Guideway Status Report

November 2017

2017 Guideway Status Report 1

Prepared by: The Minnesota Department of Transportation 395 John Ireland Boulevard Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155-1899 Phone: 651-296-3000 Toll-Free: 1-800-657-3774 TTY, Voice or ASCII: 1-800-627-3529

In collaboration with:

The Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101-1805 Phone: 651-602-1000

To request this document in an alternative format, call 651-366-4718 or 1-800-657-3774 (Greater Minnesota). You may also send an email to [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 2

Guideway Status Report ...... 1

Legislative Request ...... 5

Introduction ...... 7

Statewide Planning ...... 7 Regional Planning...... 8 Summaries: Corridors in Operation, Construction or Design ...... 12

METRO Blue Line (Hiawatha) LRT ...... 12 Summary Financial Plan-Blue Line ...... 12 Northstar Commuter Rail...... 16 Summary Financial Plan-Northstar ...... 16 Red Line Bus Rapid Transitway/Cedar Avenue Transitway ...... 20 Summary Financial Plan-Red Line ...... 20 METRO Green Line/Central Corridor LRT ...... 24 Summary Financial Plan-Green Line ...... 24 METRO Green Line Extension (Southwest LRT) ...... 28 Summary Financial Plan-Southwest LRT ...... 29 METRO Orange Line BRT/I-35W South ...... 32 Summary Financial Plan ...... 33 METRO Blue Line Extension / Bottineau LRT ...... 36 Summary Financial Plan-Bottineau LRT ...... 37 Metro Gold Line (Gateway Corridor) BRT ...... 40 Summary Financial Plan ...... 41 Corridors in Planning or Analysis Phases ...... 43

Highway 169 Mobility Study ...... 43 Summary Financial Plan-Hwy 169 BRT ...... 44 I-35W North ...... 46 Midtown Corridor ...... 47 Summary Financial Plan-Midtown Corridor ...... 48 Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar ...... 50 Summary Financial Plan-Nicollet Central ...... 51 Red Rock Corridor ...... 54 Robert Street Corridor ...... 56

2017 Guideway Status Report 3

Summary Financial Plan-Robert Street ...... 57 Rush Line Corridor ...... 61 Summary Financial Plan-Rush Line ...... 62 Riverview Corridor ...... 65 Summary Financial Plan-Riverview Corridor ...... 65 West Broadway Corridor ...... 68 Summary Financial Plan-West Broadway ...... 68 Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors ...... 70

Northern Lights Express - Minneapolis to Duluth High Speed Passenger Rail ...... 70 Summary Financial Plan-NLX ...... 71 Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago Intercity Passenger Rail Service Phase 1 Study ...... 74 Summary Financial Plan-TCMC ...... 75 Zip Rail - Twin Cities to Rochester High Speed Rail Corridor ...... 77 Twin Cities to Milwaukee Portion - High Speed Rail Corridor to Chicago ...... 78 Summary Financial Plan-HSR from Twin Cities to Milwaukee ...... 79 Capacity Analysis ...... 81

General Approach ...... 81 Capital Cost Analysis ...... 81 Operating Cost Analysis ...... 82 Capital Maintenance Cost Analysis ...... 83 Appendix A: Transit Funding Sources ...... 97

Transit Funding Sources and Programs ...... 97 Federal Transit Funding ...... 97 State Transit Funding ...... 99 Metropolitan Council Funding...... 99 Counties Transit Improvement Board Funding ...... 100 Local Funding ...... 100 Appendix B: Acronyms used in Report ...... 105

2017 Guideway Status Report 4

Legislative Request

This report was completed to comply with 2016 Minnesota Statutes 174.93, subdivision 2.1

174.93 Guideway Investment.

Subdivision 2. Legislative report. (a) By January 15, 2012, and by November 15 in every odd-numbered year thereafter, the commissioner shall prepare, in collaboration with the Metropolitan Council, and submit a report electronically to the chairs and ranking minority members of the legislative committees with jurisdiction over transportation policy and finance concerning the status of guideway projects (1) currently in study, planning, development, or construction; (2) identified in the transportation policy plan under section473.146; or (3) identified in the comprehensive statewide freight and passenger rail plan under section 174.03, subdivision 1b. (b) At a minimum, the report must include, for each guideway project: (1) a brief description of the project, including projected ridership; (2) a summary of the overall status and current phase of the project; (3) a timeline that includes (i) project phases or milestones; (ii) expected and known dates of commencement of each phase or milestone; and (iii) expected and known dates of completion of each phase or milestone; (4) a brief progress update on specific project phases or milestones completed since the last previous submission of a report under this subdivision; and (5) a summary financial plan that identifies, as reflected by the data and level of detail available in the latest phase of project development and to the extent available: (i) capital expenditures, including expenditures to date and total projected expenditures, with a breakdown by committed and proposed sources of funds for the project; (ii) estimated annual operations and maintenance expenditures reflecting the level of detail available in the current phase of the project development, with a breakdown by committed and proposed sources of funds for the project; and (iii) if feasible, project expenditures by budget activity. (c) The report must also include a systemwide capacity analysis for investment in guideway expansion and maintenance that: (1) provides a funding projection, annually over the ensuing ten years, and with a breakdown by committed and proposed sources of funds, of: (i) total capital expenditures for guideways; (ii) total operations and maintenance expenditures for guideways;

1 In 2017 1st Special Session, HF3, Ch. 3, Art. 3, Sec. 104 modified the language under Minn. Stat. 174.93. Although not repealed, the changes made to the language were substantial moving the responsibility for this report from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and placing it with the Metropolitan Council. This necessitated moving the law into the chapters of law directly related to the Metropolitan Council. The new language, beginning with the October 15, 2018 report will then list Minn. Stat. 473.4485, subd. 2. .

2017 Guideway Status Report 5

(iii) total funding available for guideways, including from projected or estimated farebox recovery; and (iv) total funding available for transit service in the metropolitan area; and

(2) evaluates the availability of funds and distribution of sources of funds for guideway investments. (d) The projection under paragraph (c), clause (1), must be for all guideway lines for which state funds are reasonably expected to be expended in planning, development, construction, or revenue operation during the ensuing ten years. (e) Local units of government shall provide assistance and information in a timely manner as requested by the commissioner or council for completion of the report.

Report Cost: The cost of preparing the report elements required by 2016 Minn. Stat. 174.93 is approximately $25,000 for MnDOT, Metropolitan Council, transit agency and county staff to compile and analyze data, write and produce the report.

2017 Guideway Status Report 6

Introduction

In 2010 the Minnesota Legislature adopted Minn. Stat. 174.93, which required the Minnesota Department of Transportation to prepare, in collaboration with the Metropolitan Council, a biennial report on the status of “guideway” projects in the state, with an emphasis on funding sources and project progress. In the 1st Special Session of 2011, the legislature amended the statute to require that the report take a system view as well as a project view and that it include information about uses of funds in addition to funding sources. The last report was submitted in November 2015. The statute required the report in mid-November of odd-numbered years. This is the 2017 Guideway Status Report. The statute defines “guideway” as a form of transportation service provided to the public on a regular or ongoing basis that operates on exclusive or controlled rights of way. Thus, guideways include light rail transit, commuter rail, street cars, intercity passenger rail and bus service that use a dedicated or managed lane. The statute further requires that the report include those guideways undergoing planning, design or construction, as well as those already in operation. The statutory definition of “guideway” is slightly narrower than the term “transitway,” which is the term more commonly used by regional transit planners. In addition to light rail transit, commuter rail and dedicated bus rapid transit corridors, the region’s 2040 Transportation Policy Plan includes in the definition of “transitway” those corridors with bus rapid transit operating on major arterial roadways without a dedicated or managed lane. While the term “transitway” may be used in general discussion within this report, the scope of this report is only for those corridors meeting the narrower definition of a “guideway.” Because this report is statutorily limited to guideways, it provides neither a complete overview of planned regional transit investment nor the full context of planned comprehensive transportation policy and investments. Statewide Planning

Minnesota GO MnDOT completed Minnesota GO, a collaborative, 50-year visioning process in November 2011. The objective of this process was to better align the transportation system with what Minnesotans expect for their quality of life, economic competitiveness and environmental health. By having an overall direction for the transportation system, policies and strategies are laid out to help determine how investments will be made and how success is measured. The broad goals of this vision and related 20-year Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan, which was updated in January 2017, guide planning efforts within the state, including local and regional transportation planning, as well as intercity passenger rail.

Intercity Passenger Rail Intercity passenger rail is a statewide issue that transcends localities and regions and is overseen by MnDOT. Federal oversight and grants for passenger rail are available through the Federal Railroad Administration. The FRA currently does not have a grant program similar in scale to the Federal Transit Administration’s New Starts program and is in process of formulating common guidance and criteria for states to use when implementing intercity passenger rail. In 2008, the Minnesota Legislature required that MnDOT prepare a Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Intercity Passenger Rail Plan. This was the first plan of its kind and was completed in February 2010. It identifies rail corridors with the most potential for passenger rail development and divides them into two phases of

2017 Guideway Status Report 7

development. Among the Phase I corridors, three stand out as having the most potential for development in the next 10 years. These corridors include the Northern Lights Express between the Twin Cities and Duluth, the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative high speed rail service between the Twin Cities and Chicago, and the Rochester ZIP Rail between the Twin Cities and Rochester. All are discussed in this report. In addition to intercity passenger rail, MnDOT has authority to plan, develop and construct light rail transit and commuter rail. For commuter rail, MnDOT may delegate this authority to local entities such as the Met Council or a regional railroad authority. For light rail, both MnDOT and the Met Council have concurrent authority, and state statute requires that the Governor designate one of the agencies as the project lead. After projects are constructed, the Met Council operates and maintains light rail facilities, as well as commuter rail facilities located completely or partially within the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Regional Planning

Metropolitan Council – 2040 Transportation Policy Plan The vision for transitway development in the Twin Cities metropolitan area is identified in the Transportation Policy Plan (TPP). In January 2015, the Met Council adopted the 2040 TPP as an update to the previous 2030 TPP. A strategy in the 2040 TPP that relates to the development of transitways reads as follows, “Regional transportation partners will invest in an expanded network of transitways that includes but is not limited to bus rapid transit, light rail, and commuter rail.” 2 This strategy establishes the basis for two investment scenarios that identify transitways the region is planning for by the year 2040. The first scenario is called the Current Revenue Scenario. This scenario assumes revenues the region can reasonably expect to be available based on past experience and current laws and allocation formulas. Under federal regulations, this scenario is called “fiscally constrained.” The Increased Revenue Scenario assumes revenues the region might reasonably attain through policy changes, laws or decisions that increase local, state or federal funding sources. Under federal regulations, the programs or projects in the Increased Revenue Scenario are illustrative of what may be achieved with additional revenues, but the projects are not considered part of the approved plan. The 2040 TPP acknowledges that additional resources will be necessary to build the system of transitways that is envisioned for this region in the Increased Revenue Scenario. The 2040 TPP also includes strategies and investment plans for the rest of the transit system beyond the transitways and the investment scenarios including the costs of implementing transitways not covered by this report, such as arterial bus rapid transit. The corridor summaries provided in this report only focus on potential guideway projects included in either the Current Revenue Scenario or the Increased Revenue Scenario, since planning for these corridors is an ongoing activity regardless of the investment realities. The 2040 TPP is currently undergoing an update that is expected to be adopted in 2018. Through this update, the status of transitways in the Plan will be updated to reflect the most recent developments and the Current Revenue and Increased Revenue scenarios will be updated with a current list of projects.

Planning Process Each of the metropolitan area transit corridors incorporated into this report are identified in the TPP as either having completed a local planning process or as in the process of doing so. The planning process is designed to identify the locally preferred transit alternative for a corridor.

2Page 164 and page 190 in the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan adopted on January 14, 2015

2017 Guideway Status Report 8

Typically, this local corridor planning process is initiated and led by the county or counties in which the corridor is located. A city may also lead a corridor study when a majority of the corridor is contained within its boundaries. In February of 2012, the Met Council adopted the Regional Transitway Guidelines to help ensure that transitway projects in the Twin Cities metropolitan area are planned and implemented in a consistent, equitable, and efficient manner regardless of the entity leading the process. The process typically begins with system level planning—done in the TPP—that identifies the most promising transit corridors for study and development. The next step is an alternatives analysis, or corridor study, aimed at identifying the most appropriate mode and alignment or set of transitway improvements for a corridor. These studies can take two years or more, depending on the number of transit alternatives studied and the level of agreement among corridor stakeholders regarding the preferred alternative. The alternatives analysis process ends with the selection of a locally preferred alternative, which is then amended into the TPP. After a preferred alternative is selected, planning efforts mature into a project for implementation. In the case of light rail, the Met Council will usually assume responsibility to carry the project to completion. The graphic that follows shows the typical project development process for a corridor seeking to implement a transit option as a solution to an identified transportation need.

Figure 1: Transit Corridor Project Development Process

The next step is the design phase, which includes preliminary engineering, environmental review and final design. These steps involve progressively refining and documenting project details and associated project implementation plans and cost estimates. The process involves the Met Council, MnDOT, local stakeholders and other funding partners such as Federal Transit Administration, counties, and regional railroad authorities. When sufficient funding is secured, the project is designed, constructed and opened for revenue service and subsequently operated and maintained as part of the region’s transit system.

2017 Guideway Status Report 9

Typical Funding Sources Transit funding can come from a variety of sources. For capital projects, funding sources most often include federal grants through the FTA, state bonds, metropolitan sales tax revenues for transportation from counties, and local property taxes. For operating costs, current sources include fare revenues, state general funds, motor vehicle sales tax revenue, county sales tax revenues, and federal flexible transportation funds, which can be used in the first three years of new operations. Ongoing capital maintenance costs, on the other hand, are currently paid almost exclusively by regional federal formula funds (approximately 80 percent) and the Met Council’s regional transit capital funds (approximately 20 percent), which are bond funds authorized by the legislature with the debt service paid through the Met Council’s property tax levy. The Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB) was a major local funding partner for the transitway system from 2008 until its dissolution in mid-2017. CTIB provided funding from a ¼-cent local sales tax collected in five metropolitan counties (Anoka, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey and Washington) specifically for transitway development. As part of the dissolution of CTIB, each county is now administering a local sales tax independently at ¼-cent or ½-cent to be used for transportation purposes, not exclusively for transitway development. In most cases, this new sales tax source replaces the funding previously assumed from CTIB. More detailed information about transit funding sources is available in the capacity analysis section and in Appendix A: Transit Funding Sources.

System Branding The Met Council approved a branding framework in 2010 that unified the light rail, highway and dedicated bus rapid transit services in the Twin Cities region under a single system name and identity, with color names for different lines. The goal is to clearly communicate that users can expect service that it is frequent, fast and reliable, with special vehicles on dedicated running ways. The key is that BRT service will be light rail-like in terms of service quality and service levels (all-day frequent service) and that the connected system allows users to travel throughout the network of color-coded transit lines, without needing a schedule. The system is branded the “METRO” system. Currently, the open lines on the METRO system include the Blue, Green, and Red lines. Extensions of the Blue and Green lines are also in development along with plans for new Orange and Gold lines. The Northstar Line is not included in this system branding because the service is not available all day.

Explanation of Remaining Contents This report has two main sections. First, it contains informational summaries for individual corridors that are undergoing study, planning, design or construction, or those already in operation as a guideway project. Following these corridor summaries, the report takes a 10-year, system-wide view of capital costs, operating costs and maintenance costs. This part of the report, called the capacity analysis, includes only guideway projects that are in design, construction or operation because only these projects have chosen a guideway mode and have sufficient cost data to meaningfully look ahead 10 years.

Eight guideway projects meet the criteria for inclusion in the capacity analysis section of this report: • Blue Line (Hiawatha LRT) • Green Line (Central Corridor LRT) • Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) • Green Line Extension (Southwest LRT) • Northstar Commuter Rail • Orange Line (I-35W South BRT) • Red Line (Cedar Avenue BRT) • Gold Line (Gateway Dedicated BRT)

2017 Guideway Status Report 10

Potential guideway projects that are still in the feasibility or alternatives analysis study phases are not included in the capacity analysis. These corridors are still considering several transit alternatives with varying modes and alignments, leading to a wide range of potential capital and operating costs. However, the individual corridor summaries do include their potential cost ranges, if project costs have been estimated for the corridor. In addition, given that these corridors are still being studied, it is uncertain whether a guideway project will be selected as the preferred transit option for the corridor and/or whether the project will progress into design and construction during the 10-year timeframe of the capacity analysis.

Metropolitan area corridors in the study phase include the following: • Highway 169 • Midtown • Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar • Robert Street • Rush Line • Riverview • West Broadway Intercity passenger rail projects are also among the group of corridors still in the study phase. Intercity passenger rail projects included in the corridor summaries are: • Northern Lights Express corridor from Minneapolis to Duluth • Twin Cities to Milwaukee High Speed Rail

Terminated and Suspended Corridors Since the previous report was published in 2015, the following corridors have been removed from future studies and/or consideration: • I-35W North • Red Rock • Rochester ZIP Rail These corridors are still included in this summary document and the individual description of each route has been updated to show their current status.

2017 Guideway Status Report 11

Summaries: Corridors in Operation, Construction or Design

METRO Blue Line (Hiawatha) LRT

Corridor Description The METRO Blue Line is a 12-mile light-rail transit line linking downtown Minneapolis and the Mall of America via the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The corridor travels through Minneapolis and Bloomington with 19 stations, including five stations shared with METRO Green Line in downtown Minneapolis. The METRO Blue Line opened for service in 2004. It operates 24 hours a day with train frequencies every 10 minutes during rush hours and midday, every 15 minutes in the early morning and early evening hours, and less frequent service overnight. There are park-and-ride facilities at Fort Snelling and 28th Avenue Stations. Connecting bus service is available at most other stations. In 2016, the METRO Blue Line carried 10.3 million rides, an average of 30,300 riders per day. The Blue Line connects directly to the U.S. Bank Stadium/Mall of America Field and Target Field, with connections to Northstar at the Target Field Station. The METRO Blue Line also provides special event service.

Project Status and Timeline The METRO Blue Line was extended to Target Field in 2009 to provide service to Target Field and the Northstar commuter rail line. This extension was funded as part of the Northstar project.

Progress Update Target Field Station provides multimodal connections between the METRO Blue Line, METRO Green Line, and the Northstar commuter rail. Target Field Station will accommodate a future METRO Green Line Extension, METRO Blue Line Extension and High Speed Rail Amtrak Service. Construction was completed in 2014. Summary Financial Plan-Blue Line

Capital Cost, Funding and Budget Activities The METRO Blue Line cost $715.3 million to construct. Due in part to higher-than-anticipated demand, the following large capital improvements were made since construction was completed: • 31st Street park-and-ride (Lake Street Station) • Three-car train sub-stations at Mall of America (no longer active as of March 2015) and Target Field • 28th Avenue park-and-ride • Three-car light-rail trains • American Boulevard Station • Light rail vehicle storage building • Operating and maintenance facility expansion • Light rail positive train control technology • Rail Systems facility building • Automatic Passenger Counters “APC’s” • Three-car train station extensions • Rail Interlockings

The cost of these improvements totals approximately $127.5 million, all of which has been committed, with $116 million spent to date and the remainder to be spent in 2017. After combining these subsequent improvements with initial construction, the total capital cost for the METRO Blue Line project is $842.8 million.

2017 Guideway Status Report 12

Table 1: Blue Line Capital Funding Sources

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Federal 414.1 414.1 49 State G.O. Bonds 100.0 100.0 12 State T.H. Bonds 20.1 20.1 2 Metropolitan Airport 87.0 87.0 11 Hennepin County 84.2 84.2 10 Mall of America (in-kind) 9.9 9.9 2

Total for the Initial Construction Costs 715.3 715.3 86

Federal 97.0 97.0 11 State of Minnesota (G.O. Bonds) 1.0 1.0 <1 Metropolitan Council 29.1 29.1 3 Other 0.4 0.4 <1

Total for Subsequent Improvements 127.5 127.5 14

TOTALS 842.8 842.8 100

Note: Spent as of July 2017

Table 2: Blue Line Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M)* LRV procurement 74.7 74.7 Transitway design-build 269.4 269.4 Fare collection equipment 3.6 3.6 Capital and equipment 162.3 162.3 Project contingency 12.0 12.0 Airport segment 143.5 143.5 Corridor improvements 49.8 49.8 Subsequent capital improvements 116 11.5 127.5

TOTAL 831.3 11.5 842.8

Note: Spent as of July 2017

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs When the METRO Blue Line opened, after farebox revenue, the net operating funding was provided through a state general fund appropriation and by the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority. When the CTIB was formed in 2008, the Hennepin County RRA’s share was shifted to CTIB. In addition, Minn. Stat. 473.4051 passed in 2008 requiring that “after operating and federal money have been used to pay for light rail operations, 50 percent of the remaining costs must be paid by the state.” From 2009 to 2013, due to state budget deficits, the state

2017 Guideway Status Report 13

general fund appropriation has been held constant and did not increase to cover additional operating costs. In fiscal year 2011 the base state general fund appropriation for the METRO Blue Line was $5.2 million annually, or approximately 33 percent of net operating costs. Beginning in fiscal year 2014 the state provided a general fund appropriation to cover the full 50 percent of the net operating costs, as reflected in the table below. In 2017, the proposed budget for the METRO Blue Line is expected to be $36.1 million. With anticipated farebox and other revenues of $11.4 million, the net operating cost is expected to be $24.7 million.

Table 3: 2017 Blue Line Proposed Operating Budget Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) Fare revenue 10.6 10.6 30 State 12.4 12.4 34 CTIB/County Sales Tax 12.4 12.4 34 Other revenues* 0.7 0.7 2

TOTAL 36.1 36.1 100

Note that percentages in the table above are based on total operating cost, not net operating cost. *Primarily from Advertising

Note that percentages in the table above are based on total operating cost, not net operating cost. Capital maintenance costs are different from operating costs. Operating costs include vehicle operator salary and benefits, fuel, vehicle cleaning and maintenance and other administrative costs. Annual capital maintenance includes track maintenance, periodic vehicle overhauls, signal work and other smaller-scale capital improvements. Because such costs vary significantly year-to-year, this report takes a multi-year view. From 2004 to 2014, the METRO Blue Line’s average capital maintenance cost was approximately $3.0 million per year. Due to continued heavy use of system equipment, the age of the equipment and periodic vehicle overhauls, the average annual average amount is estimated to increase to $12.1 million per year for the period of 2015 to 2025. After 2025, maintenance costs will continue to rise as equipment ages and vehicle and equipment overhauls are necessary. For more information about capital maintenance costs by year, see the capacity analysis portion of this report.

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit)

Project Contact

John Humphrey 612-349-5601 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 14

Figure 2: METRO Blue Line Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 15

Northstar Commuter Rail

Corridor Description The Northstar commuter rail line travels 40 miles from Big Lake in Sherburne County to downtown Minneapolis, where it connects with the METRO Blue Line and the METRO Green Line at the Target Field Station. The Northstar line provides 14 weekday trips. This breaks down to six inbound and six outbound trips, and one reverse commute peak hour trip each morning and afternoon. The line serves six suburban park-and-ride stations on its way to downtown Minneapolis at Big Lake, Elk River, Ramsey, Anoka, Coon Rapids, and Fridley. Three roundtrips are offered on weekends. The Northstar line carried over 711,000 riders in 2016, an average of more than 2,534 riders per weekday. It also provides event rides to Target Field Station for Twins and Vikings games and other special events.

Project Status and Timeline The Northstar line was completed in 2009. The project included an extension of the METRO Blue Line from the Warehouse District Station to Target Field Station, where it connects with the Northstar.

Progress Update Target Field Station provides multimodal connections between the METRO Blue Line, the METRO Green Line, and the Northstar commuter rail. Target Field Station was built to accommodate future extensions of the METRO Green Line, the Blue Line, and High Speed Rail Amtrak Service. Summary Financial Plan-Northstar

Capital Cost, Funding Sources and Budget Activities The Northstar line was constructed as a part of the FTA’s program called New Starts. The initial budget was $320 million, including $2.6 million provided by the Minnesota Twins outside the full funding grant agreement. The Fridley station was built concurrently with the overall project but funded separately at a cost of $14.4 million. Additionally, the Ramsey station was funded separately and completed in 2012 at a cost of $13.4 million. This brings the total budgeted capital cost for the Northstar line to $347.7 million, as shown in the Capital Funding Sources table below. To date, Northstar has expended $340.7 million, with an additional $2.1 million expected expenditures for the remainder of the project, for a total of $342.8 million.

2017 Guideway Status Report 16

Table 4: Northstar Capital Funding Sources Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) FTA New Starts 161.9 161.9 46 State of Minnesota 102.6 102.6 29 Northstar Corridor Development Authority 51.0 51.0 15 Metropolitan Council 7.4 7.4 2 Other (Minnesota Twins) 2.6 2.6 1 CTIB 12.9 12.9 4 Anoka County RRA 1.9 1.9 <1 City of Fridley 3.8 3.8 1 City of Ramsey 3.6 3.6 1 TOTAL 347.7 347.7 100

Table 5: Northstar Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M)*

Initial Cost of Northstar Construction 80.9 2.1 83.0 ROW & existing improvements 110.9 110.9 Vehicles 67.7 67.7 Professional services 49.3 49.3 Unallocated contingency 0 0 Finance charges 4.1 4.1 Total Initial Cost 312.9 2.1 315.0 Fridley Station Construction 8.6 8.6 ROW & existing improvements. 4.5 4.5 Vehicles Professional services 1.3 1.3 Unallocated contingency Finance charges Total Initial Cost 14.4 0 14.4 Ramsey Station Construction 6.5 6.5 ROW & existing improvements. 5.0 5.0 Vehicles Professional services 1.2 1.2 Unallocated. contingency 0.7 0.7 Finance Charges TOTAL 13.4 0 13.4 *Spent as of July 2017

2017 Guideway Status Report 17

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Throughout the planning, construction and applications for federal funding of the Northstar, it was assumed that the Northstar’s net operating costs would be funded similarly to the METRO Blue Line. It was planned that the local entities-Anoka, Sherburne and Hennepin counties-would fund half of the cost while the state would fund the other half. With the creation of the CTIB in 2008, the Anoka County and Hennepin County shares were transferred to the CTIB to be paid using metropolitan area sales tax revenues. Due to state budget deficits since 2008, no state funding for the Northstar’s operating costs was appropriated and the states’ share was paid by the Met Council (41.95 percent) and MnDOT (8.05 percent) using motor vehicle sales tax funds. The local share of net operating costs was shared by the CTIB (41.95 percent) and Sherburne County (8.05 percent). In 2017, the budget for the Northstar line is expected to be $19.0 million. With anticipated farebox revenues of $2.4 million, the expected net operating cost for the line is $16.6 million.

Table 6: Northstar’s 2017 Proposed Operating Budget

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Fare revenue 2.4 2.4 13 Metropolitan Council (MVST) 7.0 7.0 37 CTIB/County Sales Tax 7.0 7.0 37 MnDOT (MVST) 1.3 1.3 <7 Local (Sherburne County) 1.3 1.3 <7

TOTAL 19.0 0 19.0 100

Note that the percentages in the table above are based on total operating cost, not net operating cost.

Capital maintenance costs are different from operating costs. Operating costs include vehicle operator salary and benefits, fuel, vehicle cleaning and maintenance, and other administrative costs. Annual capital maintenance includes periodic vehicle overhauls, systems upgrades, passenger stations, vehicle maintenance facility improvements and other smaller-scale capital improvements. Because such costs vary significantly year-to-year, this report takes a multi-year view. For years 2017 to 2027, the average annual capital maintenance cost for the Northstar is expected to be approximately $3.78 million per year. These costs will continue to increase as the system ages and vehicle and equipment overhauls are necessary. For more information about capital maintenance costs by year, see the capacity analysis portion of this report.

Other Project Information

Lead Agency Project Contact

Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit) John Humphrey 612-349-5601 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 18

Figure 3: Northstar Line Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 19

Red Line Bus Rapid Transitway/Cedar Avenue Transitway

Corridor Description The METRO Red Line/Cedar Avenue Transitway is a bus rapid transitway that extends from the Mall of America in Bloomington to 181st Street in Lakeville, connecting Bloomington, Eagan, Apple Valley and Lakeville. The Red Line includes six stations. Four stations are park and ride facilities, and are located at the Mall of America, Cedar Grove, Apple Valley Transit Station and in Lakeville on Cedar at 181st Street. In addition to the park and ride stations, there are two walk-up stations located near 140th and 147th streets in Apple Valley. Stage 1 work is complete and the Red Line launched service in June 2013. Stages 2, 3, 4, and 5 are planned to occur from 2017 – 2040. More detailed information on these stages is published as part of the Cedar Avenue Implementation Plan adopted in December 2015. Projected 2016 ridership is just over 253,000 and ridership is anticipated to increase about 1.0 percent a year.

Table 7: Red Line BRT Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

Locally Preferred Alternative 2004 Project Development 2006-2008 Engineering 2008-2010 UPA Investments 2008-2010 Stage 1: Construction of park-and-rides 2009-2010 Stage 1: Expansion of BRT express services 2009-2010 Stage 1: Construction of bus shoulder lanes 2011-2013 Stage 1: Construction of stations 2012-2013 Stage 1: Launch of BRT station-to-station service June 2013 Stage 2 2015-2020 Stage 3 2021-2025

Progress Update The Red Line began operations in June 2013. Summary Financial Plan-Red Line

Capital Cost, Funding Sources and Budget Activities Stage I of the transitway was recently completed at a total cost of approximately $110 million. The following figures relate to stages 2 and 3 (through 2026) of the Cedar Avenue Transitway.

2017 Guideway Status Report 20

Table 8: Red Line Capital Funding Sources

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) Other Federal 12.4 11.5 23.9 31 State of Minnesota 1.3 18.1 19.4 25 CTIB 10.4 10.4 14 Local (Counties/RRAs) 3.6 13.7 17.3 22 Local (Other) 1.4 4.9 6.3 8

TOTAL 29.1 48.2 77.3 100

Table 9: Red Line Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M)* Construction 11.5 51.1 62.6 ROW, Land, Existing Improvements Vehicles 5.7 5.7 Professional Services 9.0 9.0 Unallocated Contingency Finance Charges

TOTAL 11.5 65.8 77.3

*Spent as of December 31, 2016

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs

Table 10: Red Line 2017 Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)* Fare revenue 0.2 0.2 6 Motor Vehicle Sales Tax 1.6 1.6 46 CTIB 1.6 1.6 46 Other (advertising) 0.1 0.1 2

TOTAL 3.5 0 3.5 100

2017 Guideway Status Report 21

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Metropolitan Council

Project Contact

Heather Aagesen-Huebner Director, Finance and Administration Metropolitan Transportation Services, Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North St. Paul, MN 55101 651-602-1728 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 22

Figure 4: Red Line Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 23

METRO Green Line/Central Corridor LRT

Corridor Description The METRO Green Line is 11 miles long and connects downtown St. Paul and downtown Minneapolis via University Avenue and the University of Minnesota. The corridor also travels through the State Capitol complex and the Midway area. The line has 18 stations and shares five stations with the METRO Blue Line in downtown Minneapolis, connecting to the Northstar commuter rail line at Target Field Station. The Green Line makes three stops in downtown St. Paul. The METRO Green Line opened for service in 2014. It operates 24 hours a day with train frequencies every 10 minutes during rush hours and midday, every 15 minutes in the early morning and early evening hours, and less frequent service overnight. In 2016, the METRO Green Line carried 12.7 million riders, an average of 39,386 rides per day. The METRO Green Line connects directly to the U.S. Bank Stadium Station and Target Field with connections to Northstar at the Target Field Station.

Project Status and Timeline The METRO Green Line was completed in June 2014.

Progress Update Target Field Station provides multimodal connections between the METRO Blue Line, METRO Green Line and the Northstar commuter rail. Target Field Station will accommodate a future METRO Green Line Extension, METRO Blue Line Extension and High Speed Rail Amtrak Service. Summary Financial Plan-Green Line

Capital Cost, Funding Sources and Budget Activities The METRO Green Line cost $956.8 million to construct. Due in part to higher-than-anticipated demand, the following large capital improvement projects were made since construction was complete: • LRT Diagnostics and Technology System Enhancements • Operating Maintenance Facility SCADA Modifications • Traffic Controller Upgrades • Rail Interlockings The cost of these improvements totals approximately $10.2 million, all of which has been committed, with $2.6 million spent to date and the remainder to be spent in 2017. After combining these subsequent improvements with initial construction, the total capital cost for the METRO Green Line is $967 million.

2017 Guideway Status Report 24

Table 11: Green Line Capital Funding Sources

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Federal Sources 478.4 478.4 49 CTIB 284.0 284.0 29 State of Minnesota 91.5 91.5 9 Ramsey County RRA 66.4 66.4 7 Hennepin County RRA 28.2 28.2 3 St. Paul 5.2 5.2 1 Central Corridor Funders Collaborative 0.5 0.5 <1 Metropolitan Council 2.6 2.6 <1

Total for Initial Construction Costs 956.8 0 956.8 98+

Federal Sources 8.2 8.2 1 Metropolitan Council 2.0 2.0 <1

Total for Subsequent Improvements 10.2 0 10.2 1+

TOTALS 967.0 0 967.0 100

Table 12: Green Line Capital Funding Uses

Spent to-date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M)*

Construction 517.1 2 519.1 ROW, land, existing improvements 38.4 0 38.4 Vehicles 178.3 0 178.3 Professional services 188.9 2 190.9 Unallocated Contingency 11.6 2 13.6 Finance charges 2.9 13.6 16.5 Subsequent capital improvements 2.6 7.6 10.2

TOTAL 939.8 27.2 967.0

*Spent as of July 2017

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Revenue service started June 14, 2014 with the State of Minnesota, as required under Minn. Stat. 473.4051, and the CTIB each expected to provide 50 percent of net operating costs. In 2017, the proposed budget for the METRO Green Line is expected to be $38.2 million. With anticipated farebox and other revenues of $12.6 million, the net operating cost is expected to be $25.6 million. For more detail about future operations funding, see the capacity analysis portion of this report.

2017 Guideway Status Report 25

Table 13: Green Line 2017 Proposed Operating Budget

Spent to-date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Fare Revenue 11.8 11.8 31 Federal (CMAQ) 1.2 1.2 3 State (general fund) 12.2 12.2 32 CTIB/County Sales Tax 12.2 12.2 32 Other (advertising) 0.8 0.8 2

TOTAL 38.2 0 38.2 100

Note that the percentages in the table above are based on total operating costs, not net operating costs

Capital maintenance costs are different from operating costs. Operating costs include vehicle operator salary and benefits, fuel, vehicle cleaning and maintenance, and other administrative costs. Annual capital maintenance includes track maintenance, periodic vehicle overhauls, signal work and other smaller-scale capital improvements. Because such costs vary significantly year-to-year, this report takes a multi-year view. For years 2017 to 2027, the average annual capital maintenance cost for the Green Line is expected to be approximately $5.1 million per year. These costs will continue to increase as the system ages and vehicle and equipment overhauls are necessary. For detailed information about annual capital maintenance costs, see the capacity analysis portion of this report.

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit)

Project Contact

John Humphrey 612-349-5601 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 26

Figure 5: METRO Green Line Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 27

METRO Green Line Extension (Southwest LRT)

Corridor Description The METRO Green Line Extension, more commonly known as the Southwest Light Rail Transit Project, will operate from downtown Minneapolis through the communities of St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Eden Prairie, passing in close proximity to the city of Edina. The alignment is primarily at-grade and includes 15 new stations (excluding Eden Prairie Town Center, which is deferred for construction at a later date) and approximately 14.5 miles of double track. The line will connect major activity centers in the region including downtown Minneapolis, the Opus/Golden Triangle employment area in Minnetonka and Eden Prairie, downtown Hopkins, Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital in St. Louis Park, the Eden Prairie Center Mall and the Chain of Lakes. Ridership is projected at about 34,000 weekday boardings. As an extension of the METRO Green Line, it will provide a one-seat ride from Eden Prairie to downtown St. Paul. It will be part of an integrated system of transitways, including connections to the METRO Blue Line, the Northstar Commuter Rail line, major bus routes and proposed future transitways.

An additional 27 light rail vehicles will be added to the Green Line fleet for the operation of the Southwest LRT line. The additional LRVs will be stored and maintained in a new Operations and Maintenance Facility that will be located in Hopkins.

Project Status and Timeline On Sept.2, 2011, the FTA approved the Southwest LRT project to enter Preliminary Engineering. On Aug.19, 2016, the Southwest Project Office transmitted the project’s 2016 New Starts submittal for FFY 2018 and documented its completion of the Preliminary Engineering/Project Development phase. On Dec. 21, 2016 FTA approved the project to enter Engineering based on an overall medium-high rating.

Table 14: METRO Green Line Extension/Southwest LRT Project Status and Timeline

Project Milestone Date(s)

Locally Preferred Alternative May 2010 Preliminary Engineering Sept. 2011 - Dec. 2016 Record of Decision July 2016 Engineering Dec. 2016 - 2018 Construction 2018 - 2022 Full Funding Grant Agreement 2019 Revenue Service 2023

Progress Update The project received approval under Minnesota’s municipal consent law from all cities along the proposed route and Hennepin County in August 2014. In May 2015, the Met Council published the Green Line Extension Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement, which evaluated potential impacts in three segments of the proposed LRT route resulting from adjustments to the design of the project since publication of the Draft EIS in 2012. In September 2015, Hennepin County and municipalities along the route provided approval for the project in a second municipal consent process, covering changes in project scope described in the Supplemental Draft EIS.

2017 Guideway Status Report 28

In May 2016, the FTA and Met Council published the Final EIS followed by the FTA’s issuance of the Record of Decision in July 2016. In August 2016, the project secured local funding to apply for the federal match and the Met Council approved the final project scope and budget. The Met Council also submitted the application to enter the engineering phase of the Federal Transit Administration's New Starts funding process. In December 2016, the FTA approved Southwest LRT to enter the engineering phase of the New Starts process and the Met Council awarded the Light Rail Vehicle contract to Siemens. In 2017, the Met Council finalized the 100 percent design plans, worked on the construction bid documents and started hiring construction staff. The civil construction contract Invitation for Bids was issued in February 2017. In September the Met Council rejected all four bids. The Met Council issued a second Invitation for Bids on October 10, 2017 with bids due in May 2018. Summary Financial Plan-Southwest LRT

Capital Cost, Funding Sources and Budget Activities The current overall cost estimate for the Southwest LRT Project is $1.858 billion.

Table 15: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension) Capital Funding Sources

Source Committed ($M) Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%)

Federal Transit Administration 928.8 928.8 50.0 Hennepin County 393.6 393.6 21.2 Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB) 226.4 226.4 12.2 State of Minnesota 30.4 30.4 1.6 Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) 185.8 185.8 10.0 Other Local 92.7 92.7 5.0

Total 928.8 928.8 1,857.7 100

Table 16: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension) Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M) *

Construction 982.8 982.8 ROW, Land, Existing Improvements 17.6 234.4 252.0 Vehicles 23.4 102.9 126.3 Professional Services 179.7 97.7 277.4 Unallocated Contingency 164.1 164.1 Finance Charges 55.0 55.0

TOTAL 220.7 1,636.9 1,857.6

*Spent as of Sept 30, 2017

2017 Guideway Status Report 29

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs The Green Line Extension is forecast to begin revenue service in 2023. Operating costs for the first full year of operation are estimated at $30.4 million. With anticipated farebox and other operating revenues of $9.5 million, the net annual operating costs to be covered by Hennepin County and other local sources are estimated to be $20.9 million.

Table 17: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension) Proposed Operating Budget (first full year of operation)

Source Committed ($M) Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%)

Fare revenue 8.7 8.7 28 State (general fund) County Sales Tax and Other Local 20.9 20.9 69 Other (advertising) 0.8 0.8 3

TOTAL 0 30.4 30.4 100

Capital maintenance costs are different from operating costs. Operating costs include vehicle operator salary and benefits, fuel, vehicle cleaning and maintenance, and other administrative costs. Annual capital maintenance includes track maintenance, periodic vehicle overhauls, signal work and other small-scale capital improvements. For more information about capital maintenance costs, see the capacity analysis portion of this report.

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit)

Project Contact

Mark W. Fuhrmann New Starts Rail Program Director Metropolitan Council Southwest LRT Project Office 6465 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 612-373-3810 [email protected]

Jim Alexander Project Director, Southwest LRT Metropolitan Council Southwest LRT Project Office 612-373-3880 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 30

Figure 6: Map of METRO Green Line Extension

2017 Guideway Status Report 31

METRO Orange Line BRT/I-35W South

Corridor Description The 17-mile METRO Orange Line BRT project will use roadway improvements, upgraded transit stations and improved bus service to provide fast, frequent and reliable all-day transit service along I-35W. Buses will travel on Marquette and 2nd Avenues in downtown Minneapolis, using congestion-free, transit-only lanes. South of downtown, the Orange Line will provide frequent, limited-stop service to upgraded stations at Lake Street and 46th Street in Minneapolis, 66th Street and 76th Street in Richfield, American Boulevard and 98th Street in Bloomington, and Nicollet Avenue and Burnsville Parkway in Burnsville. A second phase of the project could extend service and improvements to six additional miles from Burnsville to Lakeville. Major infrastructure improvements are planned for the I-35W & Lake St and Knox Ave & American Blvd stations. All Orange Line stations will have upgrades in platform ticketing, information technology and passenger amenities. Numerous investments in the I-35W South corridor have helped to establish strong transit markets for both station-to- station and express BRT, while also providing major station improvements that are critical to opening Orange Line service. The suite of corridor transit services will continue to benefit from shared capital improvements and complementary service planning. Express and limited stop services in the corridor currently carry about 14,000 daily rides. Orange Line service is forecast to carry around 11,000 rides each weekday by 2040, for a corridor total of 26,000 daily rides between transitway and express service.

Project Status and Timeline BRT was the clear modal choice for this corridor. For many decades, bus investments were made in this corridor, and incremental BRT implementation has followed MnDOT’s 2005 35W Bus Rapid Transit Study. The runningway for the Orange Line was developed throughout several MnDOT projects to install MnPASS express lanes on I-35W between Burnsville and Minneapolis. This includes the Crosstown Commons reconstruction, which was concurrent with construction in 2009 of the I-35W & 46th St Station. Several elements of the Orange Line were advanced by the 2007 Urban Partnership Agreement grants from the USDOT and associated local matches from state and local sources. The UPA grants included: the funded conversion of HOV lanes to MnPASS HOT lanes, the construction of four transit-only lanes on Marquette and 2nd Avenue, the construction of the Kenrick park-and-ride in Lakeville, and the purchase of buses for express service. The costs of these past roadway projects are not included in the overall cost of the Orange Line BRT project below. The Orange Line Project Plan Update, adopted in July 2014, summarizes all planned components of the BRT project to date, detailing preferred station locations, routing and right of way needs, frequency of service and technology recommendations. The Project Plan also served as the basis for entry into the Federal Transit Administration Small Starts Project Development program in November 2014. The Orange Line received NEPA clearance in January 2017 from the FTA, and submitted an updated Small Starts project information in September 2017 to be considered for a Small Starts Grant Agreement. The Orange Line is the product of a significant partnership between federal and local agencies. A large portion of the project is made possible by a concurrent I-35W Transit/Access highway project advanced by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Elements of the Orange Line project will be delivered through a MnDOT-held construction contract that was let in June 2017 letting and awarded in August 2017. The Orange Line received a Letter of No Prejudice from FTA in February 2017 to advance these project elements with local funding and protect federal funds. Orange Line project scope elements delivered through the MnDOT Partnership Agreement include the construction of the 12th Street Ramp and I-35W & Lake St Station.

2017 Guideway Status Report 32

Metro Transit began station design and engineering in 2016 and will reach 100% design by early 2018. The project is initiating real estate acquisition in the Knox Avenue & I-494 area, with anticipated completion by early 2018. Project construction, apart from the I-35W Transit/Access scope elements, will begin in 2018. The Orange Line will continue to engage partner agencies, community members, transit riders, employers, institutions, and other stakeholders, as the project completes design and initiates construction. Revenue service will begin following the completion of MnDOT’s I-35W construction project, in 2020 or 2021.

Table 18: Orange Line BRT Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

MnDOT BRT Study 2005 UPA/managed lane construction 2008 – 2010 Marquette and 2nd downtown transit lanes open 2009 Project Plan Update 2014 Project Development 2015 – 2017 Station Design & Engineering 2016 – 2018 Land Acquisition 2017-2018 Construction 2017 – 2020

Summary Financial Plan

Capital Cost, Funding Sources and Budget Activities Including potential transit-related costs of corridor roadway improvements, the Orange Line’s estimated project cost is $150.8 million in year-of -expenditure, with construction expected to occur between 2017 and 2020. Funding was anticipated from local, state and federal sources, including participation by the Counties Transit Improvement Board. With the dissolution of CTIB, the remaining CTIB funding share will be split between the participating counties. The project’s federal Small Starts funding request was $74.1 million. Cost estimates have remained stable as the project has progressed to 100% design of the I-35W MnDOT road/transit scope and 60% design of the remaining project elements.

Table 19: Orange Line Capital Funding Sources (2017 dollars)

Committed Source Proposed ($M) Total ($M) Share (%) ($M) FTA New Starts (5309) 74.1 74.1 49 Federal, Other (5307 &CMAQ) 8.8 8.8 6 CTIB (2015-2017 7.9 7.9 6 Post CTIB Hennepin County and HCRRA 38.6 38.6 25 Post CTIB Dakota County and DCRRA 5.9 5.9 4 State of Minnesota & Metropolitan Council 15.5 15.5 10 TOTAL 76.7 74.1 150.8 100

2017 Guideway Status Report 33

Table 20: Orange Line Capital Funding Uses (thru July 31, 2017)

Spent to date Budget Activity (2017 dollars) Projected ($M) Total ($M) ($M)

Construction 93.0 93.0 ROW, Land, Existing Improvements 14.0 14.0 Vehicles 11.9 11.9 Professional Services & Soft Costs 7.4 12.1 19.5 Unallocated Contingency 12.3 12.3

TOTAL 7.4 143.3 150.7

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs A significant amount of express and limited bus service existed in the I-35W corridor prior to the UPA improvements, estimated in 2010 dollars at approximately $15.5 million annually. This service is funded through fares and the Met Council’s general transit operating revenues. It is anticipated that most of this service and base funding will continue after full implementation of Orange Line BRT. Orange Line service is expected to begin in 2020, with its first full year of operations in 2021. The net operating costs of this station-to-station service are expected to be shared equally between the state and Hennepin and Dakota counties. The total operating costs of the Orange Line BRT service in 2021 are estimated at $8.04 million, which includes the ongoing maintenance of stations.

Table 21: 2021 Orange Line Estimated Operations Costs – First Full Year of Service Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) Metropolitan Council/MVST 2.1 2.1 26 Farebox Revenues 3.9 3.9 48 Hennepin and Dakota Counties 2.1 2.1 26 TOTAL 0 8.1 8.1 100

Other Project Information

Lead Agency Project Contact Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit) Charles Carlson Senior Manager, Metro Transit BRT/Small Starts Project Office

560 6th Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55411612-349-7639 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 34

Figure 7: METRO Orange Line Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 35

METRO Blue Line Extension / Bottineau LRT

Corridor Description The METRO Blue Line Extension, also known as the Bottineau LRT, will operate on approximately 13.5 miles of new double track from downtown Minneapolis to the northwest serving the communities of Minneapolis, Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal and Brooklyn Park. The light rail transit is anticipated to serve a broader area to the northwest, including the communities of New Hope, Brooklyn Center, Plymouth, Maple Grove, Osseo, Champlin and Dayton. The line will serve 11 new stations. The line is expected to have an average of 27,000 weekday riders by 2040. When complete, the Blue Line Extension will connect to the existing Blue Line at Target Field Station from the northern terminus at Oak Grove Parkway Station in Brooklyn Park. The line will connect major activity centers, including downtown Minneapolis, Theodore Wirth Regional Park, downtown Robbinsdale, the Crystal Shopping Center, the Brooklyn Park commercial strip, North Hennepin Community College and the Target North Corporate Campus. The line will provide a one-seat ride to activity centers on the METRO Blue Line, including the VA Medical Center, Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and Mall of America. It will be part of an integrated system of transitways, including connections to the METRO Green Line, the Northstar Commuter Rail line, major bus routes and proposed future transitways. An additional 28 light rail vehicles will be added to Metro Transit’s fleet for the operation of the Blue Line Extension. These LRVs will be stored and maintained in a new Operations and Maintenance Facility to be located in Brooklyn Park.

Project Status and Timeline On Aug. 22, 2014, the FTA approved the Blue Line Extension project to enter Project Development. On Aug. 19, 2016, the Met Council transmitted the project’s 2016 New Starts submittal for FFY 2018 and documented its completion of the project development phase. On Jan. 19, 2017 FTA approved the project to enter engineering and received an overall medium-high rating.

Table 22: Blue Line Extension/Bottineau LRT Project Status and Timeline

Project Milestone Date(s)

Locally Preferred Alternative May-13 Project Development Aug. 2014 - Aug 2016 Municipal Consent Sept. 2016 Enter Engineering Phase Jan. 2017 - 2018 Full Funding Grant Agreement TBD Heavy Construction TBD Revenue Service TBD

Progress Update The project received approval under Minnesota’s municipal consent law from all cities along the proposed route and Hennepin County in March 2016. In July 2016, the FTA and Met Council published the Final EIS. In August 2016, the Met Council submitted its first New Starts application. In September 2016, the FTA issued the Record of Decision and the Met Council submitted its application to enter the engineering phase of the FTA’s New Starts

2017 Guideway Status Report 36

funding process. The application to enter the engineering phase of the New Starts process for the Blue Line Extension was approved by the FTA in January 2017. In December 2016, the Met Council awarded the Light Rail Vehicle contract for the Southwest LRT project to Siemens with the option to purchase additional LRVs for the Blue Line Extension. Sixty percent of the civil and OMF design plans were completed in March 2017 and the Systems 60 percent design plans were completed in May 2017. The plans were sent to Hennepin Country, the cities along the alignment and other stakeholders for review. Summary Financial Plan-Bottineau LRT

Capital Cost, Funding Sources and Budget Activities The current overall cost estimate for the Blue Line Extension is LRT Project is $1.536 billion.

Table 23: Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) Capital Funding Sources

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

FTA New Starts 752.7 752.7 49.0 Hennepin County 530.9 530.9 34.5 Counties Transit Improvement Board 85.5 85.5 5.6 State of Minnesota 1.0 1.0 0.1 HCRRA 149.4 149.4 9.7 Other – Local 16.4 16.4 1.1

TOTAL 783.2 752.7 1,535.9 100

Table 24: Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M)*

Construction 907.5 907.5 ROW, Land, Existing Improvements 65.9 65.9 Vehicles 131.9 131.9 Professional Services 91.3 170.7 262.0 Unallocated. Contingency 138.8 138.8 Finance Charges 30.0 30.0

TOTAL 91.3 1,444.8 1,536.1

*Spent as of Sept 30, 2017

2017 Guideway Status Report 37

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Operating costs for the first full year of operation are estimated at $27.6 million. With anticipated farebox and other operating revenues of $9.7 million, the net annual operating costs to be covered by the state is estimated at $8.9 million and Hennepin County or other local sources is estimated to be $8.9 million.

Table 25: Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) Proposed Operating Budget (first full year of operation)

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M)

Fare revenue 9.0 9.0 State (general fund) 8.9 8.9 Local 8.9 8.9 Other (advertising) 0.8 0.8

TOTAL 0 27.6 27.6

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit)

Project Contacts

Mark W. Fuhrmann New Starts Rail Program Director Metropolitan Council Blue Line Extension Project Office 5514 W. Broadway Ave., Suite 200 Crystal, MN 55428 612-373-3810 [email protected]

Dan Soler Project Director, METRO Blue Line Extension Metropolitan Council Blue Line Extension Project Office 5514 W. Broadway Ave., Suite 200 Crystal, MN 55428 612-373-5301 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 38

Figure 8: Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 39

Metro Gold Line (Gateway Corridor) BRT

Corridor Description The Metro Gold Line, formerly known as the Gateway Corridor, is a 9-mile long bus rapid transit transitway located in Ramsey and Washington counties. The corridor generally runs parallel to Interstate 94, connecting downtown St. Paul with its east side neighborhoods and the suburbs of Maplewood, Landfall, Oakdale and Woodbury. The corridor will feature new all-day service primarily within roadway lanes dedicated to transit, a specialized BRT vehicle fleet, and robust stations and technology improvements. The Gold Line will connect to downtown St. Paul, including the Union Depot multimodal transportation hub, and is expected to carry over 8,000 passengers per weekday by 2040. The purpose of the Gold Line project is to provide transit service to meet the existing and long-term regional mobility and local accessibility needs for businesses and the traveling public within the project area.

Project Status and Timeline

Table 26: Metro Gold Line /Gateway Corridor BRT

Milestone Date(s)

Locally Preferred Alternative Dec-16 Project Development Dec 2017 – 2019 Engineering 2019 – 2020 Full Funding Grant Agreement 2021 Construction 2021 – 2023 Revenue Service 2024

Progress Update After the 2013 Fixed Guideway Report was completed, the scoping phase of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was also completed and the locally preferred alternative was adopted into the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Regional Transportation Policy Plan. In the fall of 2014 cities and counties adopted resolutions supporting the Gold Line locally preferred alternative recommendation. A draft Environmental Impact Statement was prepared for the Gold Line. In 2015, the City of Lake Elmo withdrew its LPA support and the project underwent additional planning. A revised LPA routes into Woodbury and offers significant project benefits and was approved by all corridor cities and counties by late 2016. The revised locally preferred alternative will be adopted by the Metropolitan Council during its regular TPP update in 2018.

During 2016, the environmental review for the Gold Line switched from an Environmental Impact Statement to a less intensive Environmental Assessment. This work will be completed during the project development phase, with all environmental documentation completed in 2019.

2017 Guideway Status Report 40

Summary Financial Plan

Capital Cost, Funding Sources, and Budget Activities

Table 27: Gold Line / Gateway Capital Funding Sources

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) FTA New Starts 189.0 189.0 45 State of Minnesota 2.0 2.0 0.5 Counties Transit Improvement Board 6.0 6.0 1.5 Ramsey County 8.5 103.0 111.5 27 Washington County 8.5 103.0 111.5 27 TOTAL 25.0 395.0 420.0 100

Table 28: Gold Line / Gateway Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M) Construction 242.0 242.0 ROW, Land, Existing Improvements 53.0 53.0 Vehicles 14.0 14.0 Professional Services 70.0 70.0 Unallocated. Contingency 36.0 36.0 Finance Charges 5.0 5.0 TOTAL 0 420.0 420.0

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Table 29: Gold Line / Gateway Estimated Operating Costs

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) Fare revenue TBD TBD TBD Federal (CMAQ) State (general fund) 2.6 2.6 50 Local 2.6 2.6 50 Other (advertising) TBD TBD TBD

TOTAL 0 5.2 5.2 100

2017 Guideway Status Report 41

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit)

Project Contact

Charles Carlson Senior Manager Metro Transit BRT/Small Starts Project Office 560 6th Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55411 612-349-7639 [email protected]

Figure 9: Proposed Gold Line / Gateway Route Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 42

Corridors in Planning or Analysis Phases

Highway 169 Mobility Study

Corridor Description The Highway 169 Mobility Study is evaluating the potential for bus rapid transit along Highway 169 between Shakopee and downtown Minneapolis. The study initially screened several BRT alternatives and is currently conducting detailed analysis on the following two alternatives: • Highway BRT between Marschall Road in Shakopee and downtown Minneapolis via I-394 • Highway BRT between Marschall Road in Shakopee and downtown Minneapolis via Highway 55 Preliminary station locations were identified for each alternative and will be refined through further evaluation efforts. The study is being led through a partnership between MnDOT, the Metropolitan Council and Scott County. In addition to the transit analysis, MnPASS Express Lanes are also being evaluated. Numerous stakeholders are engaged in the study including Hennepin County; the cities of Shakopee, Prior Lake, Savage, Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, Minnetonka, Hopkins, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, Plymouth and Minneapolis; SouthWest Transit; Minnesota Valley Transit Authority; Metro Transit; the Federal Highway Administration; the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community; and the Highway 169 Corridor Coalition. The Highway 169 corridor rated “high” for potential all-day station-to-station BRT service in the Met Council’s 2014 Highway Transitway Corridor Study. The Met Council initiated the Highway Transitway Corridor Study to examine the potential for all-day, frequent, station-to-station, highway bus rapid transit along nine Twin Cities corridors. The Highway 169 Mobility Study is looking at the corridor in more detail.

Table 30: Projected Ridership by 2030

Alternative 1: I-394 Alternative 2: TH 55

Station-to-Station BRT Service 7,400 6,600 Existing Express Bus Service 1,000 1,000 Total Corridor Service 8,400 7,600

Project Status and Timeline

Table 31: Hwy 169 BRT Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

Prioritized concept in regional Highway Transitway Corridor Study May-14 Highway 169 Mobility Study complete with implementation plan Late 2017 recommendations Draft Environmental Review 2018-2019

2017 Guideway Status Report 43

Progress Update More detailed alignment and station location analysis has occurred through the Highway 169 Mobility Study, which will result in a preferred alignment and preliminary station locations at the completion of the study in late 2017. Summary Financial Plan-Hwy 169 BRT

Table 32: Hwy 169 BRT Project Costs (Preliminary Estimates from Highway 169 Mobility Study, 2017)

Alternative 1: I-394 Alternative 2: TH 55

BRT Capital Cost (2016$) $67.4 Million $69.0 Million

BRT Operating and Maintenance Cost (Annual) $16.5 Million $17.1 Million

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

MnDOT Metro District

Project Contact

Brad Larsen MnPASS Policy & Planning Program Director MnDOT Metro District 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 Office: 651.234.7024 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 44

Figure 10: Highway 169 Corridor Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 45

I-35W North

Corridor Description The I-35W North Corridor extends from downtown Minneapolis to Forest Lake. Travel in the 26-mile corridor is primarily commuter-oriented during peak hours, with highway volumes of 100,000 vehicles per day north of I-694 and more than 120,000 vehicles per day from Highway 36 to downtown Minneapolis. The corridor includes the communities of Columbus, Forest Lake, Lino Lakes, Blaine, Circle Pines, Lexington, Shoreview, Mounds View, New Brighton, Arden Hills, Roseville, St. Anthony and Minneapolis. The corridor includes a bus-only shoulder lane between downtown Minneapolis and 95th Avenue in Blaine. There are more than 5,000 daily riders on nearly 170 transit trips connecting downtown Minneapolis via I-35W North, and Forest Lake. Approximately half of these riders come from the vicinity of 95th Avenue and Forest Lake. The other half come from the direction of Roseville and Maplewood and access the corridor where I-35W and Highway 36 meet.

Project Status and Timeline The I-35W North Managed Lanes Corridor Study concluded that BRT is not currently cost effective in this corridor. However, this could change based on future need and development along the corridor.

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Minnesota Department of Transportation and Metropolitan Council

Project Contact

Scott McBride Minnesota Department of Transportation 651-234-7700 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 46

Midtown Corridor

Corridor Description The Midtown Corridor travels 4.4 miles through the heart of south Minneapolis along the Lake Street and Midtown Greenway alignments. The corridor features dense residential neighborhoods, a thriving commercial district, several major employers and multiple connections to the regional transit network. While the corridor is currently served by high frequency local and limited-stop bus routes, traffic congestion and high ridership make transit service very slow. An alternatives analysis completed in 2014 explored a broad range of options for transit improvements in the corridor. A combination of bus and rail improvements is recommended to meet the travel needs of the Midtown corridor. The project Alternatives Analysis concluded with a recommended Locally Preferred Alternative for arterial BRT improvements along Lake Street from West Lake Station (Green Line Extension) to Snelling Station (Green Line), and double/single track rail along the Midtown Greenway. The combined ridership of these improvements is 26,000 per weekday, with corridor ridership of 32,000 rides per weekday. The study is complete, with future corridor progress including adoption of a Locally Preferred Alternative dependent on additional transit funding.

Project Status and Timeline

Table 33: Midtown Corridor Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

Alternatives Analysis Study Complete April 2014 TBD- not within the Met Council's Transportation Policy Plan Adopt Locally Preferred Alternative Current Revenue Scenario Environmental and Engineering Full Funding Grant Agreement Construction Revenue Service

Progress Update The Midtown Alternatives Analysis study is complete, with future corridor progress including adoption of a Locally Preferred Alternative dependent on the following: • Resolutions of local support for the recommended LPA • Additional transit funding to enable additional projects to be funded • Increased definition of Midtown rail vehicle as streetcar or single-vehicle LRT

2017 Guideway Status Report 47

Summary Financial Plan-Midtown Corridor

Planning-phase cost estimates were generated for the Midtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis for the recommended improvements. These preliminary assessments estimated the costs for this project at approximately $215-250 million for the combined BRT ($50 million) and rail improvements ($185-200 million). Potential sources of funding and greater definition of uses will be defined in future project phases.

Capital Cost, Funding Sources, and Budget Activities

Table 34: Midtown Corridor Capital Funding Sources

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Unknown Future Sources 250.0 250.0 100

TOTAL 0 250.0 250.0 100

Table 35: Midtown Corridor Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M)*

Bus Improvements 50.0 50.0 Rail Improvements 200.0 200.0

TOTAL 0 250.0 250.0

Alternatives Analysis study was funded with federal planning assistance ($600,000) matched by Met Council funding ($150,000). These activities are considered pre-project development and are not included in capital budget activities or previous expenditures above.

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs The project’s Alternatives Analysis estimated annual operating and maintenance costs are in 2012 dollars. Bus operations were estimated at $7 million annually, with rail operations at $8 million annually. The combined alternative (recommended LPA) annual operating cost is $15 million.

Table 36: Midtown Corridor Estimated Operating and Maintenance Costs (2012$)

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Unknown Sources 15.0 15.0 100

TOTAL 0 15.0 15.0 100

2017 Guideway Status Report 48

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit)

Project Contact

Charles Carlson Senior Manager Metro Transit BRT/Small Starts Project Office 560 6th Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55411 612-349-7639 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 49

Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar

Corridor Description The Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar is a 3.7-mile modern streetcar line running between Lake Street and 8th Street SE on Nicollet Avenue, Nicollet Mall, Hennepin Avenue and 1st Avenue NE. The streetcar is planned to operate as a high-frequency service, serving short trips with stops approximately every quarter mile, running in mixed traffic with cars and buses, and using modern streetcar vehicles. It will improve transit connectivity between downtown and neighborhoods north of the Mississippi River and south of I-94, while also providing improved circulation along Nicollet Mall for employees, visitors and shoppers. The 3.7-mile modern streetcar starter line is projected to generate over 10,000 regular weekday riders.

Project Status and Timeline An alternatives analysis for a 9-mile study corridor was completed in September 2013. The 3.7-mile Nicollet- Central Modern Streetcar was recommended by the Minneapolis City Council as the Locally Preferred Alternative, with the support of an interagency policy advisory committee in October 2013. In late 2013, Minneapolis initiated the preparation of an Environmental Analysis report for the corridor in accordance with FTA regulations and requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. The report centers on a slightly modified LPA, and will document the short-term and long-term effects of the project including social and economic factors, physical factors, and indirect and cumulative effects. A majority of the EA technical studies and documentation are completed, with the historical and archaeological resource (Section 106) analysis nearing completion.

Table 37: Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

Corridor-related transit studies 2005 - 2012 Alternatives Analysis 2012 - 2013 Locally Preferred Alternative 13-Oct Environmental Analysis Fall 2013 –Spring 2018 Engineering 2018-2019 Construction 2020-2021 Revenue Service 2022-2023

Progress Update Since the 2015 Guideway Status Report, three additional Operations and Maintenance Facility sites were analyzed. A draft Section 106 Assessment of Effects report was prepared. Work is currently underway to provide further information on station design, traffic and travel times in the along the corridor. The EA will be updated for submittal to FTA as soon as this additional analysis is completed.

2017 Guideway Status Report 50

Summary Financial Plan-Nicollet Central

Capital Cost, Funding Sources, and Budget Activities Capital costs to complete the 3.7-mile Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar are estimated at $260 million (in 2022 dollars). Professional services for the work initiated to date (the alternatives analysis and environmental assessment) are funded through a $900,000 grant through the FTA Alternatives Analysis program and $1.6 million from Minneapolis. Funding for the remaining $258 million in capital costs is not secured; however, Minneapolis is working with regional partners to pursue the following funding sources: federal sources appropriate for streetcar projects, such as FTA Small Starts and/or the discretionary TIGER grant program; Minneapolis funds, such as the value capture district established for the Nicollet-Central streetcar project; and regional sources, such as revenue from a possible expansion of the transit sales tax.

Table 38: Nicollet Central Capital Funding Sources Committed Proposed Source Existing ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) ($M) City of Minneapolis-Value Capture District 1.6 25.0-75.0 25.0-75.0 10-30 Federal Grant Alternatives Analysis 0.9 1.7 <1 FTA New Starts and/or TIGER Grant 100.0 75.0-100.0 35 Regional Sources 75.0-125.0 85.0-135.0 30-50 TOTAL 2.5 26.0-75.0 175.0-225.0 186.7-311.7 75-100

Table 39 Nicollet Central Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Projected Budget Activity TOTAL ($M) ($M)* ($M)**

Guideway 25.0 25.0 Stations/stops 7.0 7.0 Support facilities 19.0 19.0 Site work and special conditions 45.0 45.0 Systems 29.0 29.0 Right-of-way 6.0 6.0 Vehicles 70.0 70.0 Professional Services 1.7 35.3 37.0 Contingency 22.0 22.0

TOTAL 1.7 258.3 260.0

*Spent as of June 2017 **Projected costs are estimated in 2016 dollars inflated to 2022 dollars

2017 Guideway Status Report 51

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs The estimated annual operating and maintenance cost for the 3.7-mile streetcar is $13.5 million in 2022 dollars, excluding an estimated $2.9 million reduction in corridor bus operating costs; thus, the net increase in estimated operating and maintenance costs is $10.6 million in 2022 dollars.

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

City of Minneapolis

Project Contact

Liz Heyman City of Minneapolis (Public Works) 612-673-2460 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 52

Figure 11: Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 53

Red Rock Corridor

Corridor Description The Red Rock Corridor is a 30-mile corridor connecting Hastings, Union Depot in downtown St. Paul and downtown Minneapolis. The corridor generally follows the alignments of U.S. Highway 61 and Interstate 94 and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Canadian Pacific railways. The corridor runs through the communities of Cottage Grove, Denmark Township, Hastings, Newport, St. Paul Park, St. Paul and Minneapolis. The Met Council projections for 2030 show a growing level of congestion in the corridor. With the projected traffic growth and no planned improvements, key locations on Highway 61, including ramps and intersections, are forecast to operate at Level of Service F during both peak periods in year 2030. The existing bus service is equally affected by congestion on Highway 61 and I-94. No transit alternative is currently available from Hastings to downtown St. Paul or downtown Minneapolis. As population and employment increase, demand for transportation also increases. Because of job growth in Minneapolis and St. Paul, increased mobility and greater access to employment is needed for both downtowns. The project would also provide system connectivity to increase transit destinations for persons using existing and planned transit systems in the Twin Cities area. A preliminary alternatives analysis completed in 2007 recommended expanding bus service, increasing bus frequency and providing additional park and ride facilities as the first steps toward building a stronger transit base in the corridor. A commuter rail line was identified as the long-term transit option. The alternatives analysis was updated in 2014 and it was identified that commuter rail is no longer a valid option because of high cost and because the all-day transit market is becoming increasingly important. All the communities in the corridor shifted focus to bus rapid transit. An Implementation Plan to determine the timeline for implementation, the costs and funding sources was completed in 2016.

Project Status and Timeline An alternative analysis was competed in 2016 and it was determined that while bus rapid transit was the preferred option, a dedicated right of way was not cost effective at this time. Local communities are pursuing other transportation options.

Other Project Information

Lead Agency Washington County Regional Railroad Authority on behalf of the Red Rock Corridor Commission

Project Contract Lyssa Leitner Washington County 651-430-4314 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 54

Figure 12: Red Rock Corridor Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 55

Robert Street Corridor

Corridor Description The Robert Street Transitway, as defined by the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan, extends from downtown St. Paul, generally along the alignment of Robert Street. However, the transitway study area included areas bounded on the north by downtown St. Paul/I-94, the Mississippi River to the east, I-35E to the west and County Road 42 to the south. The transitway study area included St. Paul, West St. Paul, South St. Paul, Sunfish Lake, Mendota, Lilydale, Mendota Heights, Inver Grove Heights, Eagan and Rosemount. The Robert Street Transitway Alternatives Analysis narrowed the potential projects to two alternatives that would operate along Robert Street.

Project Status and Timeline The Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority completed a transit feasibility study in November 2008. In April 2012, the DCRRA and the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority began an Alternatives Analysis. The Alternatives Analysis defined two alternatives- arterial bus rapid transit on Robert Street between downtown St. Paul and Mendota Road in West St. Paul or streetcar lines on Robert Street between downtown St. Paul and Mendota Road in West St. Paul-as the most able to achieve the goals defined through the AA process. In April 2015, this process concluded without the selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative. This decision was made to allow time for cities on the route to consider a transitway in their comprehensive plans and allow for a more informed LPA decision at a later time.

Robert St. Arterial Bus Rapid Transit

Table 40: Robert St. Arterial BRT Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

LPA Process, Preliminary Engineering, Environmental Documentation 2019-2021 Final Design and Letter of No Prejudice 2022 Construction 2023-2024 Opening Year 2025

Robert St. Streetcar

Table 41: Robert St. Streetcar Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

LPA Process, EA, Preliminary Engineering 2022-2023

Final Design and Letter of No Prejudice 2024-2025 Construction 2026-2028 Opening Year 2029

2017 Guideway Status Report 56

Progress Update In April 2015, the Alternatives Analysis process concluded without the selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative. This decision was made to allow time for cities on the route to consider a transitway in their comprehensive plans and allow for a more informed LPA decision at a later time. Summary Financial Plan-Robert Street

Capital Cost, Funding Sources, and Budget Activities

Table 42: Robert St. BRT Capital Funding Sources

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Other Federal 15.4 15.4 49 State of Minnesota 3.1 3.1 10 Counties Transit Improvement Board Local (Counties/RRAs) 11.3 11.3 36 Local (Other) 1.6 1.6 5 TOTAL 0 31.4 31.4 100

Table 43: Robert St. BRT Capital Funding Uses Spent to date Projected Budget Activity TOTAL ($M) ($M)* ($M)** Construction 18.2 18.2 ROW, Land, Existing Improvements 0.1 0.1 Vehicles 3.7 3.7 Professional Services 4.7 4.7 Unallocated Contingency 4.7 4.7 TOTAL 0 31.4 31.4

Table 44: Robert St. Streetcar Capital Funding Sources Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) FTA New Starts 208.2 208.2 49 State of Minnesota 42.5 42.5 10 Counties Transit Improvement Board Local (Counties/RRAs) 153.0 153.0 36 Local (Other) 21.2 21.2 5 TOTAL 0 424.9 424.9 100

2017 Guideway Status Report 57

Table 45: Robert St. Streetcar Capital Funding Uses

Spent to date Budget Activity Projected ($M) TOTAL ($M) ($M)*

Construction 260.6 260.6 ROW, Land, Existing Improvements 3.5 3.5 Vehicles 32.0 32.0 Professional Services 66.8 66.8 Unallocated. Contingency 62.1 62.1

TOTAL 0 425 425

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs

Table 46: Robert St. Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Estimated Operating Costs

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Fare revenue 1.1 1.1 23 Federal (CMAQ) State (general fund, MVST) 3.6 3.6 77 CTIB Other (counties)

TOTAL 1.1 3.6 4.7 100

Table 47: Robert St. Streetcar Estimated Operating Costs

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Fare revenue 1.1 1.0 10 Federal (CMAQ) State (general fund) 3.8 3.8 40 CTIB Other (counties) 4.8 4.8 50

TOTAL 1.1 8.6 9.6 100

2017 Guideway Status Report 58

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority

Project Contact

Joseph Morneau Transit Specialist Dakota County Physical Development Division 14955 Galaxie Avenue Apple Valley, MN 55124 952-891-7986 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 59

Figure 13: Robert Street Corridor Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 60

Rush Line Corridor

Corridor Description The Rush Line Corridor is a transportation corridor extending 80 miles from Hinckley to Union Depot in downtown St. Paul, roughly following I-35 and I-35E and Highway 61. This corridor was identified for transportation improvements by the Met Council/Metro Transit, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the Rush Line Corridor Task Force and the counties that encompass the corridor based on current and future population, employment and travel demand.

To give guidance in the process, the Rush Line Corridor Policy Advisory Committees was formed to provide policy input, direction and approval of study work efforts and make a recommendation on the locally preferred alternative. The Rush Line Corridor PAC includes Rush Line Corridor Task Force members, business organizations, Met Council, Minnesota Department of Transportation and other key stakeholders in the corridor.

Based on the findings and recommendations of the 2001 Rush Line Transit Study and the 2009 Rush Line Corridor Alternatives Analysis, a Pre‐Project Development Study began in March 2014 and was completed Aug. 2017. The PPD Study was a joint local and regional planning effort conducted by the Rush Line Corridor Task Force and led by the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority. The PPD Study focused on analyzing bus and rail alternatives within the 30‐mile study area between Forest Lake and Union Depot. After a thorough technical analysis of 55 potential route segments and seven transit modes and extensive public engagement throughout the PPD Study, Alternative 1 was identified as the Locally Preferred Alternative. The LPA includes the definition of the mode, conceptual alignment and general station locations that can be refined through further environmental and engineering efforts. Alternative 1 is defined as bus rapid transit within a dedicated guideway generally along Phalen Boulevard, Ramsey County Regional Railroad right of way and Trunk Highway 61, extending approximately 14 miles, and connecting Union Depot in downtown St. Paul to the east side neighborhoods of St. Paul and the Cities of Maplewood, Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake and White Bear Lake (see attached map). Alternative 1 best meets the project’s purpose and need and would likely qualify for Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding. Alternative 1 would be co-located with the Bruce Vento Trail through the portion of the route that uses the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority right of way. A connector bus from White Bear Lake to Forest Lake and other bus service improvements will continue to be explored during the environmental analysis phase of the project.

Project Status and Timeline Table 48: Rush Line Corridor Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

Transit feasibility study 2001 Alternatives analysis study Nov. 2009 Demonstration commuter bus Oct. 2010 – Dec. 2012 Pre-project Development Study March 2014 – Aug. 2017 Locally Preferred Alternative May 2017 Environmental Analysis Jan. 2018 - Dec. 2019 Project Development Jan. 2020 – Dec. 2021

2017 Guideway Status Report 61

Progress Update On May 26, 2017, the Rush Line Corridor Task Force acted upon the recommendations of the PAC and approved Alternative 1 as the LPA. The cities along the line including St. Paul, Maplewood, White Bear Lake, Vadnais Heights and Gem Lake and the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority were asked to support the locally preferred alternative during the summer of 2017. All letters of supporting the LPA were submitted to the Met Council for inclusion in the Transportation Policy Plan. The next phase of the project is anticipated to begin January 2018 and will include environmental analysis under the federal and state environmental review processes to avoid, minimize and mitigate potential impacts while maximizing mobility, accessibility and surrounding economic development opportunities. The public will continue to be engaged throughout the environmental review process and subsequent design, engineering and construction phases to ensure that the project is reflective of the needs of the diverse communities within the Rush Line Corridor. Summary Financial Plan-Rush Line

Capital Cost, Funding Sources, and Budget Activities The Rush Line Corridor PPD study budget is $1,787,125. As of November 2017, all the PPD budget amount has been spent. The estimated capital cost for the design, engineering and construction of the Rush Line LPA is between $420 and $475 million inflated to year 2021. The chart below reflects the high end of the cost range.

Table 49: Rush Line Capital Funding Sources

Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M)

Other Federal 233.0 233.0 49 State of Minnesota CTIB Local (Counties/RRAs) 242.0 242.0 51 Local (Other)

TOTAL 0 475.0 475.0 100

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs The estimated operating cost for the Rush Line LPA is between $7.8 and $8.0 million per year in current year dollars. The chart below reflects the high end of the cost range.

2017 Guideway Status Report 62

Table 50: Rush Line Estimated Operating Costs Committed Source Proposed ($M) TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) Fare revenue TBD TBD TBD TBD Federal (CMAQ) 0 State (general fund) 4.0 4.0 50 CTIB 0 Other (counties) 4.0 4.0 50 TOTAL 0 8.0 8.0 100

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority

Project Contact

Michael Rogers, Transit Project Manager Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority 214 Fourth Street E., Suite 200 Saint Paul, MN 55101 651-266-2773 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 63

Figure 14: Rush Line Corridor Study Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 64

Riverview Corridor

Corridor Description The Riverview Corridor connects downtown St. Paul to Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, Mall of America and the neighborhoods in between. It is defined by the Mississippi River on the south, I-35E and the river valley bluff on the north, with termini at Union Depot and the Mall of America. The corridor is analyzing multiple routes that generally follow W. 7th Street and then use either Hwy 5 or Ford Parkway to cross the Mississippi River. Routes crossing at Ford Parkway directly serve the Ford Site. The corridor is analyzing both bus and rail vehicle options. The Riverview Corridor Major Investment Study (MIS) that concluded in July 2000 was sponsored by Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority and the Federal Transit Administration. The MIS did not recommend an alternative but instead provided a focused analysis and evaluation of the mobility needs in the corridor and possible solutions. Due to significant planned and completed redevelopment, as well as increasing employment along the corridor, in 2013 corridor partners determined it was appropriate to pursue additional analysis of transitway alternatives for the corridor.

Project Status and Timeline Table 51: Riverview Corridor Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

Major Investment study 2000

Pre-project development study/LPA Feb. 2014 - Dec. 2017 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 2018 - 2020

Progress Update The Riverview Corridor is nearing completion of its pre-project development study. The study began in February 2014 and is scheduled for completion in December 2017. It is funded by RCRRA ($2,500,000). Following completion of the pre-project development study, a Locally Preferred Alternative will be selected and advanced into a draft environmental impact statement. Summary Financial Plan-Riverview Corridor

Capital Cost Capital costs depend on potential transit routes and vehicles in the transitway, as determined by the pre-project development study. The Riverview corridor is currently analyzing multiple routes and both bus and rail vehicles. The capital costs range from $75 million to $1.2 billion in 2015 dollars.

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Operating and maintenance costs depend on potential transit routes and alignments in the transitway, as determined by the pre-project development study. The estimated annual operating costs for modes identified in the transit feasibility study range from $10 million to $28 million (2015 dollars). Potential funding sources include counties, cities, regional railroad authorities and Met Council transit operating funds.

2017 Guideway Status Report 65

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority

Project Contact

Timothy Mayasich 651-266-2762 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 66

Figure 15: Riverview Corridor Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 67

West Broadway Corridor

Corridor Description Metro Transit, in partnership with Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis, completed a transit study of West Broadway Avenue in Minneapolis and Robbinsdale. The West Broadway Transit Study engaged corridor businesses and community members, evaluated transit improvements including bus rapid transit and modern streetcar and evaluated the corridor’s market potential for transit-oriented development. The project resulted in Locally Preferred Alternative recommendation in February 2017 for transit service improvements in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative recommendation was for modern streetcar along the corridor from downtown Minneapolis to North Memorial Medical Center and improved bus transit service and facilities along the study corridor. Incorporating the recommendation will require additional funding capacity, recommendations supporting the LPA from corridor cities and county and further technical evaluation of the corridor.

Project Status and Timeline

Table 52: West Broadway Corridor Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

West Broadway Transit Study 2015-Completed February 2017 Adopt Locally Preferred Alternative Unknown - dependent on future funding availability and further evaluation Environmental and Engineering Unknown Full Funding Grant Agreement Unknown Construction Unknown Revenue Service Unknown

Progress Update The West Broadway corridor was included in the previous guideway report, but had just begun the study phase in 2015. The study concluded in early 2017 with a locally preferred alternative recommendation. No further work is currently planned to develop or implement the project. Summary Financial Plan-West Broadway

The study phase contract of $615,000 was funded by the Met Council, City of Minneapolis, and Hennepin County. The table below summarizes the estimated capital and operating costs of the transit alternatives studied in the project.

2017 Guideway Status Report 68

Table 53: Estimated Capital & Operating Costs Comparison

Modern Streetcar Arterial Bus Rapid Transit (LPA Recommendation) Length 5 miles 7 miles Capital Cost (2015$) $239 million $40 million Annual Operating Cost (2015$) $9.6 million/year $5.5 million/year Average weekday ridership (2040) 3,900 4,800

Other Project Information

Lead Agency

Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit)

Project Contact

Charles Carlson Senior Manager Metro Transit BRT/Small Starts Project Office 560 6th Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55411 612-349-7639 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 69

Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors

Northern Lights Express - Minneapolis to Duluth High Speed Passenger Rail

Corridor Description The Northern Lights Express, otherwise known as NLX, is a proposed higher speed intercity passenger rail service that would operate between Minneapolis and Duluth. Terminal stations would be located in Minneapolis at Target Field Station and in Duluth at the historic downtown station known as the Depot. In Minnesota, intermediate stations are planned in Coon Rapids, Cambridge and Hinckley. There is one station proposed in Superior, WI. The NLX Project includes planning, environmental review, engineering design and construction of the infrastructure required to implement daily intercity passenger train service at speeds up to 90 mph along a 152- mile corridor on track owned by the BNSF Railway. Also included in the project will be procurement of intercity passenger rail equipment, construction of layover and maintenance facilities, selection of an operator, development of a system safety plan and completion of all agreements necessary to operate over BNSF tracks. The 2015 Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan identifies this corridor as a ‘Phase I Project in Advanced Planning’ for high-speed intercity passenger rail service. The NLX corridor meets the definition of ‘emerging HSR’ as defined in the FRA HSR Strategic Plan.

Project Status and Timeline The NLX Service Development Plan and Tier 1 Service Level Environmental Assessment were completed in March 2013. A Finding of No Significant Impact and state Negative Declaration were issued in August 2013. The NLX Project is now in the Preliminary Engineering/NEPA phase, which includes preliminary engineering, ridership forecasts, identification of station and facility locations, a financial plan and completion of the Tier 2 Environmental Assessment. The PE/NEPA phase was completed as of June 30, 2017. A FONSI is anticipated by the end of 2017.The following table summarizes the actual and projected timelines of key milestones.

Table 54: Northern Lights Express (NLX) Project Status and Timeline Milestone Date(s) Milestone Date(s) Earlier Project Phases Current PE/NEPA Phase Feasibility Studies 2000 - 2007 Preliminary Engineering/Tier 2 NEPA Aug. 2013 - June 2017 Ridership Preferred Route Concurrence (FRA) July 2011 Aug. 2013 - Dec. 2015 Analysis/Forecast/BCA/Financial Plan Station and Layover Facility Selection Final Tier 1 EA March 2013 Dec. 2013 - Aug. 2015 and Concept Design Service Development Plan (SDP) March 2013 Tier 2 Project Level NEPA Aug. 2015 - June 2017 FRA Tier 1 EA Determination / Aug. 2013 FRA Tier 2 EA Determination Sept. 2017 Minnesota Negative Declaration

Note: If sufficient funding is secured, final design, construction and vehicle procurement would take place upon completion of preliminary engineering and Tier 2 project level environmental review. Operations could begin in 2020

2017 Guideway Status Report 70

Progress Update As part of the current PE/NEPA phase, MnDOT examined several alternative operating plans to optimize ridership, revenue and benefit-cost. Variables included the number of round trips (four, five, six and eight), maximum speed (90 or 110 mph), station locations and facility locations. Each alternative operating plan was associated with a set of infrastructure improvements necessary to ensure schedule reliability and minimize the impact on freight operations. MnDOT determined that an operating plan of four round trips per day at speeds up to 90 mph is the most cost-effective operating plan. Capital cost estimates, operating costs estimates, ridership forecasts and revenue projections have been prepared for the preferred alternative of four round trips at 90 mph maximum speed. Capital cost estimates include station and facility construction, vehicle procurement and track improvements that are related to upgrade from Class 4 to Class 5 or 6 to accommodate higher speeds, extension of sidings to allow freight trains to pull off the main track for passenger trains, special track work such as crossovers to improve operational flexibility and in some locations new track. In addition, all grade crossings would be provided with warning devices including flashers, gates and medians. Operating cost estimates include labor, fuel, maintenance, access fees and cyclic capital costs. Benefit cost and economic impact analyses were prepared for the recommended operating plan. Concept designs were completed for modifications to the existing Target Field Station and Union Depot in Duluth as well as for new stations in intermediate cities and layover/maintenance facilities. MnDOT completed all preliminary engineering and environmental analysis associated with the NLX Project by June 30, 2017. The Federal Railroad Administration is expected to issue a FONSI for the Tier 2 EA by Sept. 30, 2017. Summary Financial Plan-NLX

The PE/NEPA phase of the NLX project is being funded by a federal grant administered by the Federal Railroad Administration. A related study, called the Hinckley Loop, was funded by an earlier federal earmark. The table below includes federal and state shares of these two grants along with supplemental funding provided through the Passenger Rail Office.

Table 55: NLX Funding

Committed Proposed Source TOTAL ($M) Share (%) ($M) ($M)

FRA 5.5 5.5 59

State of Minnesota 3.9 3.9 41

TOTAL 9.4 0 9.4 100

Funding for previous project phases, including the feasibility studies, the Tier 1 EA and the Service Development Plan is not included in the above table. Funding for final design, construction and vehicle procurement was not identified.

2017 Guideway Status Report 71

Other Project Information

Partnering Agencies Minnesota Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Minneapolis/Duluth Passenger Rail Alliance Wisconsin Department of Transportation

Project Contact

Dan Krom, Director Passenger Rail Office Minnesota Department of Transportation 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 470 St. Paul, MN 55155-1800 651-366-3193 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 72

Figure 16: Northern Lights Express Corridor Map

2017 Guideway Status Report 73

Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago Intercity Passenger Rail Service Phase 1 Study

Corridor Description The Minnesota Department of Transportation, Wisconsin Department of Transportation and their partners initiated the Twin Cities - Milwaukee - Chicago Intercity Passenger Rail Service Phase 1 Study, formerly known as the Second Daily Passenger Rail Trip, to improve passenger rail service between the Twin Cities and Chicago, Illinois and station communities in between. The project seeks to implement a second daily round trip passenger train on the Empire Builder route to improve mobility and increase reliable travel options, while minimizing capital investment. The proposed service would follow Amtrak’s existing long-distance Empire Builder route with termini at Chicago Union Station and Union Depot in Saint Paul. This project is based on recommendations of Amtrak’s 2015 feasibility report on the proposed service. The favorable ridership and revenue projections identified in the feasibility report supported a more detailed study of the proposed service. MnDOT and its partners are completing the detailed study of the service in two phases. The Phase 1 study will evaluate alternatives for track and other infrastructure improvements required for a second-round trip, along with anticipated costs. Phase 2 will complete environmental analysis and generate a service development plan.

Project Status and Timeline The TCMC Phase 1 Study started in summer 2016. Primary funding for Phase 1 study is being provided by WisDOT and Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority. In addition, Minnesota High Speed Rail Commission and La Crosse Area Planning Committee are providing contingency funding for the study. When Congress passed the Passenger Rail Improvement and Investment Act of 2008 it changed the way that passenger rail service is funded. Services that are not “long distance” trains (500 plus miles and not part of Amtrak’s core network) are the states’ responsibility to capitalize and to provide operating subsidies. Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois will be responsible for a portion of capital costs and operations costs not generated by revenue.

Table 56: TCMC Intercity Passenger Rail Service Phase 1 Study

Project Phase Date(s)

Amtrak completed feasibility study 2015 Phase 1 Study started Summer 2016 Phase 1 Study completion date Fall 2017

Progress Update The scope of work for the TCMC Phase 1 Study is provided below: • Pre-NEPA tasks to prepare a Purpose and Need Statement and an Alternatives Analysis that fulfills state and federal environmental requirements

2017 Guideway Status Report 74

• An operations analysis to evaluate and determine how the TCMC frequency can be operated most efficiently with freight trains on the Saint Paul to Chicago corridor and integrate with the Hiawatha schedule between Milwaukee and Chicago • Evaluation of railroad infrastructure improvements needs and conceptual engineering of those improvements to ensure the states become eligible for federal funding and allowing the project to advance toward implementation • Development of capital cost estimates for approved infrastructure improvements based on the conceptual designs • Stakeholder and public agency involvement

Summary Financial Plan-TCMC

Below is a breakdown of funding sources used for the TCMC Phase 1 Study. The funding for Phase 2 study has not been identified yet.

Table 57: TCMC Intercity Passenger Rail Service Phase 1 Study Funding Sources

Source Committed ($M) Total ($M)

Minnesota – Ramsey County RRA 0.30 0.30 Wisconsin - WisDOT 0.30 0.30 MnHSR Commission (Contingency Funds) 0.05 0.05 La Crosse Area APO 0.01 0.01

TOTAL 0.66 0.66

Other Project Information

Partnering Agencies

Minnesota Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration

Project Contact

Dan Krom, Director Passenger Rail Office Minnesota Department of Transportation 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 470 St. Paul, MN 55155-1800 651-366-3193 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 75

Figure 17: Map of the Route from the Twin Cities to Chicago with Possible Stations

2017 Guideway Status Report 76

Zip Rail - Twin Cities to Rochester High Speed Rail Corridor

Corridor Description Zip Rail refers to the proposed high-speed passenger rail service between Rochester and the Twin Cities. Traveling speeds were proposed to be 150-220 mph to provide true high-speed rail service between the Twin Cities and Rochester, the state’s third largest city. Currently, there is no existing railroad in this corridor, so the project will require construction of a new “greenfield" rail line. The 2010 Minnesota Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan identified the Rochester Corridor as a Phase 1 corridor.

Project Status and Timeline Feasibility studies for this corridor were conducted from 1990 to 2010 as part of the Tri-State Studies done in cooperation with Illinois and Wisconsin. These studies were forwarded to the Federal Railroad Administration in 2011 for review and approval. A statement of work for Alternatives Analysis, Tier 1 environmental analysis and Service Development Plan were developed by Olmsted County in cooperation with MnDOT and received the FRA’s approval. The study began in fall 2012 and was completed in early 2016. It was determined that the route was not cost effective and MnDOT suspended work on the Zip Rail project in January 2016. No future work on this project is anticipated at this point.

Table 58: HSR: Zip Rail-Twin Cities to Rochester Corridor Project Status and Timeline MILESTONE DATE Feasibility Studies 1990 - 2010 Alternatives Analysis and Tier 1 EIS Oct. 2012 – Jan. 2016

Progress Update Analysis of the information gathered for Zip Rail indicated that future development of this corridor was not cost effective at this time.

Other Project Information

Partnering Agencies

Minnesota Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Olmsted County

Project Contact

Dan Krom, Director Passenger Rail Office Minnesota Department of Transportation 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 470 St. Paul, MN 55155-1800 651-366-3193 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 77

Twin Cities to Milwaukee Portion - High Speed Rail Corridor to Chicago

Corridor Description The Twin Cities to Milwaukee corridor is a segment of the approximately 435-mile high-speed passenger rail corridor between Minneapolis-St. Paul and Chicago, which in turn is part of the Chicago Hub Network. The Twin Cities to Chicago corridor is one of several major branches in the hub-and-spoke passenger rail system centered in Chicago as identified in the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative plan.

Project Status and Timeline As part of broader MWRRI studies, the Twin Cities to Milwaukee project completed an Alternatives Analysis in 2012 to identify one route – the existing Amtrak route servicing Minneapolis, St. Paul, Hastings, Red Wing, Winona, La Crosse, Tomah, Portage, Watertown and Milwaukee – as the reasonable and feasible passenger rail alternative. A Tier 1 Environmental Impact Study and Service Development Plan started in October 2012. The study was re-scoped in 2016 to refine the Purpose & Need statement for the study and complete a Service Alternatives Report with updated ridership forecasts, rail capacity modeling and cost estimates for infrastructure improvements. This study is expected to be completed in late 2017. Tier 1 EIS and SDP studies will start when funding becomes available. The following table summarizes actual and projected timing of key project milestones.

Table 59: HSR Corridor to Chicago from the Twin Cities to Milwaukee Project Status and Timeline

Milestone Date(s)

Alternatives Analysis (MWRRI Phase 7) 2009 – 2011 Reasonable and Feasible Passenger Rail Alternative Concurrence (FRA) Nov. 2012 Minnesota Scoping and RTC Modeling June 2012 - Dec. 2015 Union Depot to MTI AA/RTC Modeling Oct. 2013 - Dec. 2015 Re-Scoping 2016 Updated Ridership Forecasts and RTC Modeling 2016 - 2017 Service Alternatives Analysis & Refine Purpose & Need 2017 Note: If sufficient funding can be secured, final design, construction, and vehicle procurement will take place upon completion of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 EIS. Operations could commence late 2025.

Progress Update Since the last report, ridership forecasts were updated and Rail Traffic Controller Modeling between Union Depot, St. Paul and Milwaukee are being updated based on requirements by the Federal Railroad Administration. The results of the updated modeling are being discussed with FRA and Canadian Pacific Railroad. Purpose & Need statement for the study will be refined and the Service Alternatives analysis report will be completed by late 2017.

2017 Guideway Status Report 78

Summary Financial Plan-HSR from Twin Cities to Milwaukee

Below is a breakdown of funding sources being used for the study. Funding for all the phases of Tier 1 EIS, Preliminary Engineering and the Tier 2 EIS has not been identified, and they have an estimated a full cost of $50 million. Work will occur as funding is identified and made available.

Table 60: HSR from Twin Cities to Milwaukee-Funding Sources for EIS and SDP

Committed Proposed Source Total ($M) ($M) ($M)

FRA (Tier 1 EIS Grant) 0.6 0.6 State of Minnesota (Tier 1 EIS Grant match) 0.6 0.6 State of Minnesota (MN Scoping) 0.09 0.09 State of Minnesota (RTC Modeling) 0.22 0.22 State of Minnesota (Union Depot to MTI Alt. Analysis/RTC Modeling) 0.73 0.73 Updated ridership forecasts, RTC modeling, Service Alternatives Analysis*

TOTAL 2.24 0 2.24

*Remaining budget from the above tasks is being used.

Other Project Information

Partnering Agencies

Minnesota Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Olmsted County

Project Contact

Dan Krom, Director Passenger Rail Office Minnesota Department of Transportation 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 470 St. Paul, MN 55155-1800 651-366-3193 [email protected]

2017 Guideway Status Report 79

Figure 18: Map of Twin Cities to Milwaukee Portion, High Speed Rail to Chicago

2017 Guideway Status Report 80

Capacity Analysis

The capacity analysis portion of the report seeks to aggregate and synthesize information about individual project finances, providing an overall view for the guideways that the corridor summaries do not provide alone. General Approach

The capacity analysis looks at regional guideway funding needs and sources related to capital, operating and capital maintenance costs for the next 10 years. Consequently, the capacity analysis consists of tables of anticipated project expenditures for each of these three categories of costs. Costs in each category are shown in the anticipated year of expenditure. Since funding requests precede anticipated project expenditures, some of the funds shown in 2017 and future years, while not yet expended, have already been secured through previous funding requests and are “committed” to the project(s). In other instances, funds shown in the future years are anticipated funding requests from the identified funding sources but are not yet committed. The text for each of the cost categories seeks to indicate the level of funding that was previously committed and those funds that have yet to be secured. The individual corridor summaries (in previous sections) also provide information about funds committed to a given project. As previously noted, due to the high uncertainty and large range of cost estimates for projects still in the planning phase, the capacity analysis section includes only those guideway projects that have an adopted locally preferred alternative and are in preliminary engineering, design, construction or operation. This includes eight corridors: • Blue Line (Hiawatha LRT) • Northstar Commuter Rail • Red Line (Cedar BRT) • Green Line (Central Corridor LRT) • Green Line Extension (Southwest LRT) • Orange Line (I-35W South BRT) • Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) • Gold Line (Gateway BRT) For past expenditures, any figures shown represent actual expenditures; for future expenditures, although the numbers shown are the best estimates currently available, they should still be viewed as estimates that may change over time. Capital Cost Analysis

Guideway project capital cost estimates are shown in Table 61 at the end of this chapter. The capital cost table is organized by anticipated expenditures. Capital costs include design and construction costs to build a guideway project, as well as costs for subsequent major, one-time capital improvements that are planned to occur after the initial project construction. An example is expanding station platforms or purchasing additional vehicles as demand for service increases. At this time, such subsequent capital cost expenditures are anticipated to occur only for some of the guideway projects currently operating (i.e., Blue Line, Northstar, Red Line, and Green Line). Total estimated capital cost for the eight guideway projects is about $6.3 billion. This total includes a substantial amount of funding that has already been spent or committed. All capital funding for the initial portions of four of the projects – Blue Line, Northstar commuter rail, Red Line Stage 1 and Green Line– is been identified and is either spent or committed.

2017 Guideway Status Report 81

Projected sources to complete the Green Line Extension include $928.8 million from the federal New Starts program, $30.4 million from the state and RTC, $226.4 million from CTIB, $185.8 million from the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority, $393.6 million from Hennepin County, and $92.7 million from other local sources. Capital funding needs for the Blue Line Extension project are estimated at $1.536 billion. Projected sources of funds include $752.7 million from the federal New Starts program, $530.9 million from Hennepin County, $149.4 million from the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority, $85.5 million from CTIB, $16.4 million from other local sources and $1 million from the state. Capital funding needs for the Orange Line project are estimated at about $151 million and the funding shares are based on receiving a federal Small Starts grant with about 55 percent from federal sources. The rest breaks down to 10 percent from state sources (a portion of which may be trunk highway bonds for roadway-related project elements), 6 percent from CTIB and 29 percent from Hennepin and Dakota Counties. Stage II of the Red Line BRT project extends from 2013 to 2020, with capital expenditures of $73.5 million anticipated. Stage III is slated to begin in 2021. Capital funding needs for the Gold Line project are estimated at about $420 million and the funding shares are estimated based on received a federal New Starts grant with about 45 percent from federal sources. The rest breaks down to 0.5 percent from state sources, 1.5 percent from CTIB and 27 percent each from Washington and Ramsey counties. Operating Cost Analysis

Operating costs include annual vehicle operator salaries and benefits, fuel, vehicle cleaning and other administrative costs. The estimated operating costs for those guideway projects expected to be in operation by 2027 are shown in Table 61 at the end of this chapter. Operating costs are typically paid first through fares and any operating revenue generated by the guideway project, such as advertising revenue. The remaining operating costs are referred to as the net operating costs or subsidy. Historically, they have been paid from a combination of state, CTIB, Met Council and federal revenues. With the dissolution of CTIB in 2017, going forward operating costs will be paid from a combination of state, county, Met Council and federal revenues. Minn. Stat. 473.4051, subd. 2(a) states that, “after operating and federal money have been used to pay for light rail operations, 50 percent of the remaining costs must be paid by the state.” In line with state law, this capacity analysis assumes that 2017, net operating costs for Blue Line, Green Line, and Blue Line Extension will be shared 50 percent by the state and 50 percent by the county(ies) In the capacity analysis table, these operating revenues are shown as “state (Minn. Stat. 473.4051 obligation).” Any other expectation of state funding for guideway operations that does not fall under this statutory requirement is shown in the table as “state (additional request).” Minn. Stat. 473.4051, subd. 2(b) requires that operating and maintenance costs for the Green Line Extension be paid for by non-state sources; therefore, the analysis local funders to pay the net operating costs for the Green Line Extension. This capacity analysis includes an assumption that the state will continue fully funding its 50 percent share of the Blue Line and Green Line, followed by a 50 percent contribution to the net operations of the Blue Line Extension when it opens in 2022. The county will be responsible for covering all of the net operating costs for the Green Line Extension, when it opens in 2022. The Green Line opened in 2014 and in the first three years of operations the Green Line received a $7.0 million Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality grant that contributed $2.3 million each year in federal funds for 3 years. This reduced the operating cost contributions from both the state and CTIB for half of 2014, 2015 and 2016 and approximately half of 2017. The Green Line Extension is expected to open in 2022, with 2023 its first full year of operation. The state funding share for the Green Line Extension is $0. The Blue Line Extension is expected to open

2017 Guideway Status Report 82

in 2022, with its first full year of operation in 2023; the state funding share for 2023 is estimated to be $8.9 million. By the end of 2022, four LRT services will be in full operation, with three anticipating state funds for operations. The 50 percent state share of net operating costs will total approximately $37.3 million. There is no state statute that addresses how the operating costs for commuter rail are to be funded. The financial analysis section of the Northstar Commuter Rail New Starts application showed that the net costs were assumed to be paid 50 percent from the state and 50 percent from local sources. However, no state appropriation has yet been made for Northstar operations. To date, the assumed 50 percent state share has been funded using motor vehicle sales tax funds contributed from Met Council and MnDOT sources. This capacity analysis assumes these sources will continue to be used to fund a state 50 percent share of Northstar’s net operating costs, estimated to be $8.1 million in 2016, growing to $10.5 million for 2025. The Red Line BRT service has secured federal CMAQ grant funding of $1.1 million per year for 2014 and 2015, decreasing to $0.1 million in the final grant year, 2016, with remaining costs distributed between CTIB and the Met Council. From 2017 forward, net operating costs are presumed to be split equally between the Met Council and the respective counties. The funding shares for the Orange Line station-to-station BRT service are expected to parallel the LRT cost shares; so, for these services it is expected that the net operating costs will be shared equally between Council/MVST and the counties. Council/MVST costs for the Orange Line’s net operating in 2021 are estimated to be $2.1 million. The funding shares for the Gold Line station-to-station BRT service operating costs are anticipated to be split equally between the Met Council and the counties; these shares are estimated to be $2.6 million for the Council and $2.5 million for the counties starting in 2024. The operating cost split between Ramsey County and Washington County is not yet determined. In 2027, the state share of the seven fully operational LRT and BRT guideway projects will total approximately $46.4 million. Capital Maintenance Cost Analysis

Capital maintenance includes ongoing capital costs typically included in an annual capital budget, such as track maintenance, periodic vehicle overhauls, signal work and other smaller-scale capital improvements. These maintenance costs can vary significantly from year-to-year depending on the needed maintenance; accordingly, this capacity analysis uses costs averaged over time. In addition, capital maintenance costs start out low as a new corridor is opened, but grow over time as the line ages and more ongoing maintenance is required. As rail corridors come on-line, the federal transit formula funding allocated to the metropolitan region typically increases due to the added guideway mileage and service. It is expected that this will continue to occur and that additional federal funds will be available to pay 80 percent of the annual capital maintenance costs of the guideways in the future. The Met Council, using its Regional Transit Capital property tax-backed bonds, would be responsible for the remaining 20 percent of capital maintenance costs. The estimated capital maintenance for the guideway projects, 2017 through 2027, is shown in Table 63. For three corridors, the Red Line, the Orange Line and the Gold Line BRT services, the annual capital maintenance costs are included within those corridors’ annual operating costs, estimated in the Table 61. The Blue Line corridor has been operating for the longest period of time and has the best historical data from which to calculate annual capital maintenance costs. The capital maintenance costs for the Green Line, the Green Line Extension and the Blue Line Extension are modeled after the experience with the Blue Line. Northstar costs are estimated based on the limited experience to-date for that corridor.

2017 Guideway Status Report 83

In 2017, capital maintenance costs for the Blue Line are estimated at $10.7 million, $1 million for Northstar and $6.5 million for the Green Line. At the end of the analysis period, 2027 capital maintenance costs are estimated to total $31.0 million for the system of four LRTs and Northstar Commuter Rail, but the figure does fluctuate year-to- year based on maintenance schedules.

Other Financial Notes

ROUNDING: As with the corridor summaries, the capacity analysis rounds estimated expenditures to the nearest $100,000. This causes some rows and columns to add imperfectly, but sums should differ by no more than $100,000 ($0.1M).

INFLATION: To facilitate meaningful comparison, the capacity analysis inflates cost estimates to the estimated year of expenditure using a capital cost inflation rate of 3.0 percent and an operating cost inflation rate of 3.15 percent. These rates were approved by the FTA and are used in the financial analysis for the Green Line New Starts full funding grant application.

CASHFLOW: As shown in the capital cost tables for the Green Line, the Green Line Extension and the Blue Line Extension LRT systems (Central Corridor, Southwest and Bottineau, respectively) federal payments for New Starts projects often do not begin until after construction has commenced, and payments typically continue for a few years after the project has been completed. To meet cash flow needs, this requires heavy front-end funding by the state, CTIB, counties and local funding sources along with borrowing by the Met Council against future federal payments once a full funding grant agreement has been issued by the FTA. The financing costs necessary for such borrowing are accounted for in project capital cost estimates, and the associated cash flow adjustments are shown in the capacity analyses for the Green Line and the Green and Blue Line Extensions.

2017 Guideway Status Report 84

Table 61: Estimated Guideway Capital Expenditures ($ millions)

Total by Pre- Blue Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Source 2017*

Federal (5309 New Starts) 414.1 414.1 Federal (Other) 97.0 97.0 State (G.O. Bonds) 101.0 101.0 State (T. H. Bonds) 20.1 20.1 Metropolitan Airport 87.0 87.0 Hennepin County 84.2 84.2 Mall of America (in-kind) 9.9 9.9 Metropolitan Council 29.1 29.1 (RTC) Other 0.4 0.4

Total 842.8 842.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

*Original Blue Line was complete prior to 2017

2017 Guideway Status Report 85 Table 61: Estimated Guideway Capital Expenditures ($ millions)

Total by Pre- Northstar 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Source 2017*

Federal (5309 New Starts) 159.7 159.7 State (G.O. Bonds) 102.6 102.6 Metropolitan Council 5.4 5.4 (RTC) Northstar Corridor Dev. 50.2 50.2 Auth. CTIB 12.9 12.9 Local 9.4 9.4 Other 2.6 2.6

Total 342.8 342.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

*Northstar was complete prior to 2017

Total by Red Line Pre-2017 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Source

Federal (5309 New Starts) 15.8 15.8 Federal (Other) 51.4 27.5 6.7 5.7 1.7 7.0 1.7 1.1 State (G.O. Bonds) 47.1 27.7 1.3 1.0 1.5 12.3 1.7 1.6 Metropolitan Council 4.1 1.2 1.4 0.1 1.4 (RTC) CTIB 34.6 24.2 10.4 Local 28.4 11.1 1.3 0.7 0.1 0.3 1.1 1.0 2.3 6.2 2.3 2.0 Other 3.4 0 0.7 0.1 0.4 2.1 0.1

Total 184.8 107.5 13.0 8.1 7.2 0.5 2.1 4.6 2.3 29.0 0 5.7 4.8

2017 Guideway Status Report 86

Table 61: Estimated Guideway Capital Expenditures ($ millions)

Total by Pre- Green Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Source 2017* Federal (5309 New Starts) 478.4 478.4 Federal (Other) 8.2 8.2 State (G.O. Bonds) 91.5 91.5 Hennepin County 28.2 28.2 Ramsey County 66.4 66.4 St. Paul 5.2 5.2 Central Corridor Funders 0.5 0.5 Collaborative Metropolitan Council 4.6 4.6 (RTC) CTIB 284.0 284.0

Local 967.0 967.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

*Original Green Line was complete prior to 2017

Total by Green Line Extension Pre-2017 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Source

Federal (5309 New Starts) 928.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 28.8 State (G.O. Bonds, 14.3 13.8 0.5 Appropriations) Hennepin County 393.6 55.4 214.9 89.7 33.6 Metropolitan Council 16.1 16.0 0.1 (RTC) CTIB 226.4 91.5 134.9 HCRRA 185.8 32.7 46.3 44.7 45.3 16.8 Local 23.7 15.0 8.7 Other 69.0 69.0 Total 1,857.7 154.0 306.1 374.7 243.7 150.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 28.8

Note: Capital expenditures post 2016 are based on actual completed forecast through year 2027.

2017 Guideway Status Report 87

Table 61: Estimated Guideway Capital Expenditures ($ millions)

Total by Orange Line Pre-2017 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Source Federal (5309 New Starts) 74.0 37.0 37.0 Federal (CMAQ) 7.0 7.0 Federal (5307 Formula) 1.8 1.0 0.8 State (G.O. Bonds & Cash 15.2 0.3 2.7 5.7 6.5 Appropriation) Metropolitan Council 0.4 0.4 (RTC) CTIB 7.9 2.4 5.5 Local-HCRRA 12.8 2.6 6.1 4.1 Local-Hennepin County 25.8 2.6 9.0 5.9 8.3 Local-DCRRA 2.1 0.4 1.0 0.7 Local-Dakota County 3.8 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.4

Total 150.8 4.1 15.0 22.8 62.2 46.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total by Blue Line Extension Pre-2017 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Source

Federal (5309 New Starts) 752.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 52.7 State (G.O. Bonds) 1.0 1.0 Hennepin County 530.9 84.1 243.1 203.7 CTIB 85.5 36.0 39.7 9.8 HCRRA 149.4 23.0 26.4 55.6 25.4 19.0 Local 16.4 3.3 8.4 4.7

Total 1,535.9 60.0 66.1 252.8 376.9 327.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 52.7 0 0

Note: Capital expenditures post 2016 are based on an actual completed forecast through year 2025.

2017 Guideway Status Report 88

Table 61: Estimated Guideway Capital Expenditures ($ millions)

Total by Gold Line Pre-2017 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Source

Federal (5309 New Starts) 189.0 45.0 67.5 67.5 9.0 Federal (Other) State 2.0 0.2 1.8 Metropolitan Council

(RTC) CTIB 6.0 3.0 3.0 Local (Counties/RRAs) 223.0 3.8 13.0 15.0 45.0 82.5 52.5 11.2

Total 420.0 0.2 8.6 16.0 15.0 90.0 150.0 120.0 20.2 0 0 0

Gold Line pre-project development costs are excluded Note: Capital expenditures post 2016 are based on an actual completed forecast through year 2027.

2017 Guideway Status Report 89

Table 61: Estimated Guideway Capital Expenditures ($ millions)

Total Capital Total Pre-2017 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Federal (5307 Formula) 1.8 1.0 0.8 Federal (5309 New Starts) 3012.5 1068.0 200.0 237.0 237.0 245.0 267.5 267.5 209.0 152.7 100.0 28.8 Federal (CMAQ) 7.0 7.0 Federal (Other) 156.6 132.7 6.7 5.7 1.7 7.0 1.7 1.1 Hennepin County 1062.7 112.4 58.0 308.0 338.7 245.6 Dakota County 3.8 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.4 Ramsey County 66.4 66.4 DCRRA 2.1 0.4 1.0 0.7 HCRRA 348.0 55.7 75.3 106.3 74.8 35.8 Metropolitan Council 59.7 56.7 0.1 1.4 0.1 1.4 (RTC) Mall of America (in-kind) 9.9 9.9 Metropolitan Airport 87.0 87.0 Northstar Corridor Dev. 50.2 50.2 Auth. CTIB 657.3 451.0 190.5 12.8 3.0 State (T.H. Bonds, G.O. Bonds and/or 394.8 357.9 4.7 7.5 6.5 1.0 1.5 12.3 1.7 1.6 Appropriations) Local (Counties/RRAs) 223.0 3.8 13.0 15.0 45.0 82.5 52.5 11.2 Local 83.1 25.7 1.3 19.0 17.2 5.0 1.1 1.0 2.3 6.2 2.3 2.0 Other 75.9 3.5 69.0 0.7 0.1 0.4 2.1 0.1

Total 6301.8 2478.1 400.3 667.0 706.0 540.0 292.1 354.6 322.3 249.2 152.7 105.7 33.6

2017 Guideway Status Report 90

Table 62: Estimated Guideway Operating Expenditures ($ millions)

Blue Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Farebox 10.6 11.7 11.8 11.9 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.5 14.8 15.0 15.1 State 12.4 12.4 13.0 13.5 13.5 14.1 14.7 15.3 15.3 16.0 16.7 CTIB/Counties 12.4 12.4 13.0 13.5 13.5 14.1 14.7 15.3 15.3 16.0 16.7 Other 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8

Total 36.1 37.2 38.5 39.6 40.8 42.1 43.4 44.9 46.2 47.8 49.3

Northstar 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Farebox 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.4 Metropolitan Council 7.0 7.1 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.1 8.3 8.6 8.8 9.1 9.4 (MVST) CTIB/Counties 7.0 7.1 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.1 8.3 8.6 8.8 9.1 9.4 Greater MN MnDOT 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 Local (Sherburne County) 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8

Total 19.0 19.6 20.3 20.9 21.6 22.4 22.8 23.7 24.4 25.2 25.8

Red Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Metropolitan Council 1.6 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 Farebox 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Other 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 CTIB 1.6

Total 3.5 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3

2017 Guideway Status Report 91

Green Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Farebox 11.8 13 13.1 13.2 14.6 14.7 14.9 15 16.5 16.7 16.8 Federal (Other) 1.2 State 12.2 12.8 13.4 13.9 13.9 14.5 15.2 15.8 15.8 16.5 17.2 CTIB/Counties 12.2 12.8 13.4 13.9 13.9 14.5 15.2 15.8 15.8 16.5 17.2 Local 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9

Total 38.2 39.4 40.7 41.8 43.2 44.5 46.2 47.5 49.0 50.6 52.1

Green Line Extension* 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Farebox 2.1 8.7 8.9 9.9 10.1 10.3 Hennepin County 2.7 20.9 21.7 21.6 22.4 23.3 Other 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8

Total 0 0 0 0 0 5.6 30.4 31.4 32.3 33.3 34.4

*As reported to the FTA in the annual New Starts Update submitted in Sept. 2017; will be updated with the annual New Starts update in 2018.

2017 Guideway Status Report 92

Table 62: Estimated Guideway Operating Expenditures ($ millions)

Orange Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Farebox 3.9 3.9 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.8 Counties 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 State 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5

Total 0 0 0 7.9 8.1 8.3 8.6 8.8 9.1 9.5 9.8

Blue Line Extension* 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Farebox 3.7 9.0 9.1 10.0 10.2 10.3 State 3.3 8.9 9.2 9.2 9.6 10.0 Local 3.3 8.9 9.2 9.2 9.6 10.0 Other 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8

Total 0 0 0 0 0 11.1 27.6 28.3 29.2 30.2 31.1

*As reported to the FTA in the annual New Starts Update submitted in Sept. 2017; will be updated when revenue service date is determined.

Gold Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Farebox (TBD in 2019+) TBD TBD TBD TBD Metropolitan Council (MVST) 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 Counties 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 Other

Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2

2017 Guideway Status Report 93

Table 62: Estimated Guideway Operating Expenditures ($ millions)

Total For All Routes 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Farebox 25.0 27.5 27.7 31.9 34.7 41.3 53.7 54.2 59.4 60.4 61.1 Federal (Other) 1.2 Greater MN MnDOT 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 Local 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 Local (Hennepin County) 6.0 29.8 30.9 30.8 32.0 33.3 Local (Sherburne County) 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 Local Counties 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.1 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 Metropolitan Council 1.6 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 Metropolitan Council (MVST) 7.0 7.1 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.1 8.3 11.2 11.4 11.7 12.0 CTIB/Counties 33.2 32.3 33.8 35.0 35.2 36.7 38.2 39.7 39.9 41.6 43.3 State 24.6 25.2 26.4 29.4 29.5 33.9 40.9 42.5 42.6 44.5 46.4 Other 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 2.4 2.4 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.5

Total 96.8 99.3 102.6 113.5 117.1 137.7 183.0 193.7 199.5 206.0 212.1

Table 63: Estimated Guideway Capital Maintenance Expenditures ($millions)

Blue Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Federal (Other) 8.5 13.0 9.0 8.2 5.9 9.6 9.9 10.3 10.6 11.0 11.4 Metropolitan Council (RTC) 2.1 0.5 2.3 2.1 1.5 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9

Total 10.6 13.5 11.3 10.3 7.4 12.0 12.4 12.9 13.3 13.8 14.3

2017 Guideway Status Report 94

Table 63: Estimated Guideway Capital Maintenance Expenditures ($ millions)

Northstar 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Federal (Other) 0.9 1.6 2.3 2.4 2.5 3.7 3.8 7.8 4.1 4.2 4.4 Metropolitan Council (RTC) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.9 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.1 1.1

Total 1.1 2.0 2.9 3.0 3.1 4.6 4.8 9.8 5.1 5.3 5.5

Note: Years 2019 and 2024 include Northstar Vehicle Overhaul Programs

Green Line 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Federal (Other) 5.2 1.9 1.7 6.6 6.4 3.8 3.6 4.6 2.5 3.8 9.0 Metropolitan Council (RTC) 1.3 0.5 0.4 1.7 1.6 0.9 0.9 1.1 0.6 1.0 2.3

Total 6.5 2.4 2.1 8.3 8.0 4.7 4.5 5.7 3.1 4.8 11.3

Total Capital Maintenance 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

Federal (Other) 14.6 16.5 13.0 17.2 14.8 17.1 17.3 22.7 17.2 19.0 24.7 Metropolitan Council (RTC) 3.6 1.4 3.3 4.4 3.7 4.2 4.3 5.7 4.3 4.8 6.2

Total 18.2 17.9 16.3 21.6 18.5 21.3 21.6 28.4 21.5 23.8 30.9

2017 Guideway Status Report 95

Table 64: Overall Totals ($ millions)

2017 - 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Pre

Federal (5307 Formula) 1.0 0.8 Federal (5309 New Starts) 1068.0 200.0 237.0 237.0 245.0 267.5 267.5 209.0 152.7 100.0 28.8 Federal (CMAQ) 7.0 Federal (Other) 132.7 15.8 23.2 18.7 17.2 14.8 18.8 17.3 29.7 17.2 20.7 25.8 Hennepin County 112.4 58.0 308.0 338.7 245.6 6.0 29.8 30.9 30.8 32.0 33.3 Dakota County 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.4 Ramsey County 66.4 DCRRA 0.4 1.0 0.7 HCRRA 55.7 75.3 106.4 74.8 35.8 Metropolitan Council 56.7 1.6 2.9 4.3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.5 5.0 3.7 3.8 3.9

Metropolitan Council (MVST) 7.0 7.1 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.1 8.3 11.2 11.4 11.7 12.0

Metropolitan Council (RTC) 3.6 1.4 3.3 4.4 3.7 4.2 4.3 5.7 4.3 4.8 6.2 Mall of America (in-kind) 9.9 Metropolitan Airport 87.0 Northstar Corridor Development Authority 50.2 CTIB 451.0 223.7 45.1 36.8 35.0 35.2 36.7 38.2 39.7 39.9 41.6 43.3 State (T.H. Bonds, G.O. Bonds and/or Approp.) 358.0 29.3 32.7 32.9 29.4 30.5 35.4 40.9 54.8 42.6 46.2 48.0 Local (Counties/RRAs) 3.8 13.0 17.0 47.1 84.5 54.6 16.0 4.9 5.0 5.1

Local (Sherburne County) 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 Local 25.7 1.3 19.0 17.2 5.0 1.1 1.0 2.3 6.2 2.3 2.0 Other 3.5 69.8 1.5 0.8 0.9 0.8 2.8 2.4 4.6 2.5 2.5 2.6

Greater MN MnDOT 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8

Farebox 25.0 27.5 27.7 31.9 34.7 41.3 53.7 54.2 59.4 60.4 61.1

Total 2478.2 514.6 783.4 824.1 674.3 426.9 512.8 526.0 470.5 372.8 334.6 275.7

2017 Guideway Status Report 96

Appendix A: Transit Funding Sources

Excerpt from Regional Transitway Guidelines Technical Report, May 2011, updated for this report October 2015. Transit Funding Sources and Programs

The following section highlights transit and transitway funding programs available under existing federal and state laws. The table at the end of this section provides a summary of the information, including a listing of the potential funding sources, the approximate amounts available annually, a summary of how the funds are made available and requirements governing how funds may be used. Federal Transit Funding

New Starts (5309) – New Starts funding may be used for new or extended fixed-guideway transit system projects. A project is only eligible for New Starts funding once it has entered the project development phase. The funding may only be used on projects approved through the New Starts application and approval process. A minimum local match of 20 percent is required for all New Starts funding. Current federal practice typically limits annual individual project funding from the New Starts program to about $100 million. Small Starts (5309) – Small Starts funding may be used on new or extended transit system projects where the total project cost is $300 million or less. Eligible transit system projects include those with fixed guideway for at least 50 percent or bus projects with 10 to 15 minute headways. A project is only eligible for Small Starts funding once it has completed project development activities and received at least a medium overall project rating from the FTA. The funding may only be used on projects approved through the Small Starts application and approval process. A minimum local match of 20 percent is required and the maximum federal grant award for Small Starts is currently $100 million. Urbanized Area Formula (5307 and 5340) – Urban Area Formula funding may be used for transit system replacement and expansion, capital purposes, preventative maintenance and the capital costs of contracting. Non- transit capital projects are not eligible for this funding. The Metropolitan Council is allocated 5307 funds through a federal formula and allocates funds to specific projects in the region through the annual development of the Council’s six-year Capital Improvement Plan. The Twin Cities region typically receives an estimated $50 million annually in 5307 funding (2014 data). A minimum local match of 20 percent is required. State of Good Repair Formula (5337) – State of Good Repair funding is a program under federal transportation law MAP-21 that is dedicated to repairing and upgrading rail transit systems along with high- intensity bus systems that use high-occupancy vehicle lanes, including bus rapid transit. These funds may be used to maintain a state of good repair on fixed guideway and high-intensity bus projects, including activities that replace or rehabilitate: rolling stock; track; line equipment and structures; signals and communications; power equipment and substations; passenger stations and terminals; security equipment and systems; maintenance facilities and equipment; and operational support equipment, including computer hardware and software. BRT on exclusive or high-occupancy vehicle lanes and bus-only shoulders replacement and rehabilitation are also included in this definition. The Metropolitan Council is allocated 5337 funds through a federal formula and allocates these funds to specific fixed-guideway and high-intensity bus facilities through annual development of the six-year CIP. The Twin Cities region typically receives an estimated $12 million annually in State of Good Repair funding (2014 data). A minimum local match of 20 percent is required.

2017 Guideway Status Report 97 Bus and Bus Facilities Formula (5339) – The Bus and Bus Facilities funding is a formula program under federal transportation law MAP-21 that allocates funding based on the size of the motor bus system. This program is very similar to Urbanized Area Formula (5307 and 5340) but is limited to capital investments and limited to bus fleets and facilities. The Twin Cities region typically receives an estimated $5 million annually in Bus and Bus Facilities formula funding (2014 data). A minimum local match of 20 percent is required. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality – Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funding may be used on transit capital and operating expansion. Existing transit operations and capital are not eligible for CMAQ funding. CMAQ funding is distributed in the region through a regional solicitation process led by the Transportation Advisory Board and its Technical Advisory Committee. The Twin Cities region typically receives an estimated $27 million annually in CMAQ funding (2013 data). The regional solicitation process limits projects to a maximum of $7 million and allocates these funds four years in advance of expected expenditure (i.e., 2011 solicitation is for funds in 2015 and 2016), although recipients can choose to advance construct projects and be reimbursed in the award year. A minimum local match of 20 percent is required. Surface Transportation Urban Program – Surface Transportation Urban Program funding is primarily used for road construction purposes in the Twin Cities region, up to $7 million per project, although most transportation- related activities in urban areas are eligible under federal law. STP-Urban funding is distributed in the region through a regional solicitation process led by the Transportation Advisory Board and its Technical Advisory Committee. To be eligible for funding, a project must meet the regional solicitation category requirements, which were recently revisited for the 2015 regional solicitation. The Twin Cities region typically receives an estimated $40 million annually in STP-Urban funding (per 2013 data). A minimum local match of 20 percent is required. Currently, solicitation categories do not include a category specifically for transit projects, but elements of a road project that benefit transit are eligible and typically given extra points on the project ranking. Transportation Alternative Program – Transportation Alternative Program (formerly known as Transportation Enhancements) funding is used primarily for bicycle, pedestrian and trail projects. To be eligible for funding, a project must meet the regional solicitation category requirements. TAP funding is distributed in the region through a regional solicitation process led by the TAB and its TAC. The Twin Cities region typically receives an estimated $7 million annually in TAP funding (2013 data). A minimum local match of 20 percent is required. Federal Railroad Administration – Federal Railroad Administration funding may be used on intercity passenger rail facilities. FRA funding is provided through congressional appropriations and varies in amount from year to year. Unified Planning Work Program (5303) – Unified Planning Work Program funding may be used for transportation planning activities, but may not be used on design, engineering, construction or capital related expenditures. As the regional Metropolitan Planning Organization UPWP funding is allocated to the Metropolitan Council’s Metropolitan Transportation Services. MTS produces an annual work program specifying how the planning funds will be used, with the majority of the funding used to support MTS planning staff work. The Twin Cities region typically receives an estimated $3.5 million annually in UPWP funding (2013 data). A minimum local match of 20 percent is required. Special Grant Programs – There are many special grant programs that may provide funding for transitway projects, past programs include the Urban Partnership Agreement, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery and Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction. The specifics for these competitive programs - eligible/ineligible uses, estimated annual amount, and local match – vary by grant type. Funding is allocated through FTA and FHWA grant processes, with some grants requiring submittal through the Metropolitan Council or MnDOT.

2017 Guideway Status Report 98

State Transit Funding

State General Fund – Funding from the state general fund is made available for transitway projects through appropriations by the state legislature and varies in amount from year to year. General funds are rarely used for capital investments and may include additional restrictions as specified in the appropriation language. General funds may be used for transitway operations. Currently the Blue Line and Green Line receive an annual general fund appropriation to cover 50 percent of the net cost of operations. General Obligation Bonds – General obligation bonds can provide funding for transitway capital and are allocated through state legislative appropriations in varying amounts. The specific use of the funds is dictated by the appropriation language. Any capital expenditure funded by GO bonds must be for a specific capital project that will have a 20-year life and the asset must be owned by the public entity specified in the appropriation. GO bonds may not be used for planning studies, alternatives analysis, technology, vehicles or operations expenditures. Minnesota Management and Budget has directed that state GO bonds appropriated to the Council are not to be passed through to sub-recipients unless the bond appropriation language permits a pass-through. MnDOT Trunk Highway Funds and Bonds – MnDOT trunk highway funds and bonds may be used on transitway projects that further a trunk highway purpose. Trunk highway funding can only be used for trunk highway purposes and cannot be used for transit operations. Capital assets that use trunk highway bonds must have a 20-year life, be owned by MnDOT and are considered part of the trunk highway system. Trunk highway funding and bonds are allocated through the state legislative process or a MnDOT grant program in varying amounts. State Laws Related to Transit Funding – Minn. Stat. 473.4051 subd. 3, prohibits state money from being used to pay more than 10 percent of the total capital cost of an LRT project. In addition, Minn. Stat. 473.4051, subd. 2, states that “after operating and federal money have been used to pay for light rail transit operations, 50 percent of the remaining costs must be paid by the state.” Metropolitan Council Funding

Motor Vehicle Sales Tax – Minn. Stat. 297B.09 allocates 36 percent of state MVST funding to the metropolitan area transit fund for transit assistance in the metropolitan area. The Metropolitan Council is responsible for allocating the funds, which are primarily used to pay for existing transit operations, both rail and bus. The funds may be used on transitway projects for existing operations or capital and operating expansion. MVST funding is allocated annually by the Council through the adopted Regional Transit Operating Revenue Allocation Procedure and Regional Transit Capital Revenue Allocation Procedure. Regional Transit Capital Bonds – Regional transit capital funds are bond funds where the debt service is paid using the Council’s transit capital levy. The legislature is responsible for authorizing the amount of RTC bonds that may be sold and the Council is responsible for setting the annual levy to pay the debt. RTC funds are used for transit capital expenditures including assets with shorter than a 20-year life, including transit vehicles and technology. RTC funds may not be used for transit operations or planning activities. RTC funds are allocated by the Council through annual development of the six- year CIP. There is typically $35 million in RTC funding available annually in the Twin Cities region.

2017 Guideway Status Report 99

Fares and Other Self-Generated Funds – Fares and other self-generated funds are typically used for transit operations. Fares from a transitway project are allocated specifically to the operations of that transitway. This allows for calculation of a net subsidy which represents the public cost after accounting for the fare revenue. The transit operator is responsible for allocating fare revenues through the budgeting process. Other self-generated revenue may include advertising revenue or interest income. These revenues are typically used for operating purposes but could be allocated to a capital expenditure. Counties Transit Improvement Board Funding

Metro Counties Sales Tax – In April 2008, under authorizing legislation contained in Minn. Stat. 297A.99, five counties – Anoka, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey and Washington – formed a joint powers board known as the Counties Transit Improvement Board and implemented a quarter-cent sales tax and a $20 motor vehicle sales tax to fund transitway projects within these counties. The sales tax raised over $100 million annually and was used for transitway capital and operating costs. CTIB adopted a Transitway Investment Framework, which established principles and rules for how the CTIB invested in transitway development. In 2014, CTIB adopted a Program of Project Investment Strategy that was updated annually and established the Board’s priorities for upcoming grant requests. The Investment Strategy served as the Board’s 5-year financial plan and tracked the long-term funding potential of the sales tax against projects expected to request funding for the next 30 years or so. Additionally, metro counties sales tax revenues were not allowed to fund more than 30 percent of the total transitway costs, though an individual component of the overall project may receive more than 30 percent if approved by CTIB. The funding was allocated through the CTIB grant application process. A minimum ten percent local (non-state) match was required for CTIB funding. The CTIB joint powers agreement terminated on September 30, 2017 by voluntary agreement of the five member counties. Combined with wind-down payments to certain member counties, CTIB provided over $1 billion in funding for investments in transit service throughout the region. Funding for future transit projects will be done by each individual county using a portion of the sales tax that is dedicated to transportation improvements. As part of the dissolution of CTIB, each county is now administering a local sales tax independently at ¼-cent or ½- cent to be used for transportation purposes, not exclusively for transitway development. In most cases, this new sales tax source replaces the funding previously assumed from CTIB. Local Funding

Regional Railroad Authority – Minn. Stat. 398A.04 provides RRAs with the power to impose a property tax levy not to exceed 0.04835 percent of the market value of all taxable property within the RRA boundary. Minn. Stat. 398A.07 states that a regional railroad authority may issue bonds as necessary to fulfill its purpose and to exercise any of its powers to provide funds for operating expenses in anticipation of revenues or for capital expenditures in anticipation of other funds. RRA funds may be available for transitway projects. Typically, these funds are used for the alternative analysis phase of development, environmental processes, right of way acquisition, or for the local match in rail projects, with the exception of the Cedar Avenue BRT project in Dakota County. RRA funds must be no more than ten percent of the total capital project cost and cannot be used for rail operations in the counties that have enacted the metro counties sales tax (see Minn. Stat. 398A.10). The amount of funding available is tied to the levy limit and is allocated through the RRA budgeting process.

2017 Guideway Status Report 100

County General Fund – County general funds may be used on transitway projects as allocated. General funds are allocated through the county budget process and vary in amount from year to year. County Highway Funds –County highway funds may be used for highway-related transit improvements, but may not be used for non-highway transitway purposes. Highway funds are allocated through the county budget process and vary from year to year. City General Fund – City general funds may be used on transitway projects as allocated. General funds are allocated through the city budget process and vary in amount from year to year. Municipal Highway Funds – Municipal highway funds may be used for highway related transit improvements, but may not be used for non-highway transitway purposes. Highway funds are allocated through the city budget process and vary in amount from year to year.

2017 Guideway Status Report 101

Table 65: Summary of Transit Funding Sources and Programs-Federal

Estimated Name (by Annual Minimum Policy/Process for Eligible Uses Ineligible Uses Source) Amount for Match (%) Allocating Funds Region ($M) Federal Funding begins in PE, New Starts Approved new or extended New Starts application / 95.0M 20 available only for (5309) fixed-guideway systems approval process approved projects New or extended systems that Funding begins in PE, Small Starts are fixed-guideway or bus Small Starts application TBD 20 available only for (5309) corridor projects with specific process approved projects components Transit system replacement and Federal formula allocation Urbanized expansion capital purposes, to Council, allocated Area Formula 50.0M 20 Non-transit capital preventative maintenance, through Council CIP (5307) capital cost of contracting development Fixed Fixed-guideway projects Federal formula allocation Guideway (including BRT on exclusive or Non-fixed guideway to Council, allocated 13.6M 20 Modernization HOV lanes) capital and projects through Council CIP (5309) preventative maintenance development Alternatives Spending complete by Annual Congressional Analysis (AA) Earmarks 20 AA activities (pre-LPA) entry into PE requests / appropriations Funding (5339) Unified Planning Work Construction / capital MTS annual work program 3.5 M 20 Planning activities Program purposes planning (5303) Transit capital and operating Existing transit TAC/TAB Regional CMAQ 7.0 M 20 expansion (up to $7 M per operations / capital Solicitation Process project)

STP (Urban Primarily road construction Must meet solicitation TAC/TAB Regional 40.0 M 20 Guarantee) purposes (up to $7M per project) category requirements Solicitation Process

Transportation Primarily bicycle, pedestrian, Must meet solicitation TAC/TAB Regional Alternatives 7.0 M 20 and trail projects category requirements Solicitation Process Program

Federal Congressional Railroad Varies Intercity passenger rail facilities appropriations, special Administration grant programs

Special grant Federal grant application programs (e.g., process, some grant UPA, ARRA, Varies Varies Varies Varies programs require submittal TIGER, through Council or MnDOT TIGGER)

2017 Guideway Status Report 102

Table 66: Summary of Transit Funding Sources and Programs- State, Metropolitan Council and Counties Transit Improvement Board

Estimated Name (by Annual Minimum Policy/Process for Eligible Uses Ineligible Uses Source) Amount for Match (%) Allocating Funds Region ($M) State

Specified in appropriation General Funds Varies N/A Rarely used for capital State legislative process language

Must meet public purpose requirement, use as specified in General Planning studies, AA, appropriation language. Capital Obligation Varies N/A technology, vehicles, State legislative process must have a 20-year life, asset Bonds non- capital uses owned by organization specified in appropriation MnDOT Trunk Must have a trunk highway State legislative process or Highway Funds Varies N/A Transit operations purpose MnDOT grant program or Bonds Metropolitan Council MVST Regional Revenue (Regionally Existing transit operations and Varies N/A Non-transit purposes Allocation Policy / Allocated expansion, capital is allowed Procedures MVST) Regional Transit Capital $35.0 M N/A Transit capital including vehicles Transit operations Council CIP development (RTC)

Fares / other Transit operator budget Varies N/A Primarily service operations self-generated process

Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB) Raises about Metro counties 10 non- Transitways capital and General transit CTIB grant application 88.0M per sales tax state operating operations, arterial BRT process year

2017 Guideway Status Report 103

Table 67: Summary of Transit Funding Sources and Programs-Local

Estimated Name (by Annual Minimum Policy/Process for Eligible Uses Ineligible Uses Source) Amount for Match (%) Allocating Funds Region ($M) Local Not more than 10% of Regional Typically used for planning, AA, capital costs. For metro Railroad environmental, ROW, local Levy limit N/A counties with CTIB RRA budget process Authority match for rail projects with sales tax, cannot be (RRA) exception of Dakota County used for rail operations

County general Varies N/A County budget process fund

County Sales Varies N/A Transportation purposes County grant process Tax

County Highway-related transit Varies N/A Non-highway purpose County budget process highway funds improvements

City general Varies N/A City budget process fund

Municipal Highway-related transit Varies N/A Non-highway purpose City budget process highway funds improvements

2017 Guideway Status Report 104

Appendix B: Acronyms used in Report

Acronym Meaning AA Alternatives analysis AAU Alternatives analysis update BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Company BRT Bus rapid transit CMAQ Congestion Mitigation Air Quality CTIB Counties Transit Improvement Board DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement EIS Environmental Impact Statement FFGA Full Funding Grant Agreement FHWA Federal Highway Administration FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HOT High occupancy toll HOV High occupancy vehicle LOS Level of service LPA Locally preferred alternative LRT Light-rail transit MIS Major Investment Study MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation MVST Motor vehicle sales tax MWRRI Midwest Regional Rail Initiative NCDA Northstar Corridor Development Authority PD Project Development PE Preliminary Engineering ROW Right of way RRA Regional railroad authority RTC Regional transit capital RTC Rail Traffic Controller SDP Service Development Plan TFAC Transportation Finance Advisory Committee TH Trunk Highway TIGER Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery TPP Transportation Policy Plan UPA Urban Partnership Agreement

2017 Guideway Status Report 105